# More state lawsuits against manufacturers of OxyContin



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

They allege that the addictive nature of opioids were suppressed deliberately. 

"Litigation against OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP is intensifying as six more U.S. states on Tuesday announced lawsuits, accusing the company of fueling a national opioid epidemic by deceptively marketing its prescription painkillers to generate billions of dollars in sales.

U.S. state attorneys general of Nevada, Texas, Florida, North Carolina, North Dakota and Tennessee also said Purdue Pharma violated state consumer protection laws by falsely denying or downplaying the addiction risk while overstating the benefits of opioids.

"It's time the defendants pay for the pain and the destruction they've caused," Florida State Attorney General Pam Bondi told a press conference."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u...purdue-pharma-over-opioid-epidemic/ar-AAxkpwQ


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

They should stop making them.


----------



## HeavyHauler (Dec 21, 2017)

HDRider said:


> They should stop making them.


And replace them with what, to chronic pain patients?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

HeavyHauler said:


> And replace them with what, to chronic pain patients?


Exactly. There isn't an easy solution to this problem, but I think Purdue Pharma is partially responsible for compensation to the states for it's alleged fraud.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Make opioids OTC. The government has no business telling us what we can and cannot put into our bodies. (and, before anyone says it, it is not their responsibility to bail us out of the consequences of our poor choices. )


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

HeavyHauler said:


> And replace them with what, to chronic pain patients?


I was offering an equally absurd point to the absurd lawsuit. 

Everyone wants to blame someone else for their problems. Everyone wants to cash in any way they can.

Stupid lawsuit.


----------



## HeavyHauler (Dec 21, 2017)

HDRider said:


> I was offering an equally absurd point to the absurd lawsuit.
> 
> Everyone wants to blame someone else for their problems. Everyone wants to cash in any way they can.
> 
> Stupid lawsuit.


I agree.


----------



## HeavyHauler (Dec 21, 2017)

Farmerga said:


> Make opioids OTC. The government has no business telling us what we can and cannot put into our bodies. (and, before anyone says it, it is not their responsibility to bail us out of the consequences of our poor choices. )


I agree wholeheartedly or allow us to grow/process our own medicines


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

HeavyHauler said:


> And replace them with what, to chronic pain patients?


Quaaludes?


----------



## Elevenpoint (Nov 17, 2009)

Don't have an answer
Watch an opioid addict not be able to find their prescription bottle by noon
Frightening


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Another pointless lawsuit that will only enrich the lawyers.
Let's sue the distilleries for not telling everyone alcohol is addictive and toxic.


----------



## HeavyHauler (Dec 21, 2017)

Shine said:


> Quaaludes?


Hell, why not?


----------



## HeavyHauler (Dec 21, 2017)

elevenpoint said:


> Don't have an answer
> Watch an opioid addict not be able to find their prescription bottle by noon
> Frightening


Some of us had bags, not bottles. And some us had both.

Got watch for them patch fiends.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Another pointless lawsuit that will only enrich the lawyers.
> Let's sue the distilleries for not telling everyone alcohol is addictive and toxic.


How about when they advertise that alcohol will make you cooler and more sexy and solve all that ails you? 

Its one thing to make a potentially lethal product that if used inappropriately will be detrimental, but its another to market it for inappropriate uses in order to maximize profits. This is what the oxy drug companies were doing. They marketed it as not being addictive. Saying that people that seemed to be addicted were in fact only long suffering without it. It created what in fact just became legalized opium dens of modern age.

Now anybody with a brain wouldnt try to restrict an actual terminal patient from as much pain medication as they want. Worrying about somebody thats dying getting addicted is silly. But it gets complicated for non terminal patients with chronic pain. No meter they can hook up to determine if patient has actual pain or is just an addict

And as much as the libertarians out there wanting to allow neighborhood opium dens as an individual choice, and just let the stupid overdose and die, having significant numbers of addicts does affect the whole society. Crimes committed to buy their drugs, etc since serious addicts can only think about next fix, not holding a job to earn money to support their habit. Prisons to hold the addicts committing crimes, etc. Course the libertarians could hold a bake sale to raise funds to give the addicts free drugs so they wouldnt have to commit crimes to support their habit......


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> Its one thing to make a potentially lethal product that if used inappropriately will be detrimental, but its another to market it for inappropriate uses in order to maximize profits. This is what the oxy drug companies were doing.





HermitJohn said:


> They marketed it as not being addictive.


You're repeating the media hype and ignoring all the warning labels on the drugs.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

I have been in the medical field for 27 years now....NEVER have I heard a dr tell anyone that oxycontin was not addictive. I have had to be on it a few times in my life, just recently for two surgeries a year apart. Each time the dr went over the warning's and had me relay back to them I understood, there were no refill's on the prescription and I had to come back to the office in 10 to 14 days for a follow up appointment.

The town I am in, we have a high rate of addicts due to medication and meth. Many scream they want rehab facilities built as their loved one "needs" the help. None of them will man up and show any personal responsibility for their actions, you talk to them and they will come up with 101 excuses why it is NOT their fault, but everyone and everything else around them. I don't want my hard earned tax dollars to go to a facility that these people will go in for a short time, think they are cured and right out they go to repeat the cycle, or state they didn't know. Yea okay.

Now, anyone going to a medical facility and needing pain meds, it is going to be like pulling teeth due to those who have addictions and are suing doctors for their family members issues or screaming it is the medical facilities problem or fault. Anyone who needs pain meds, are told Tylenol or Aleve, something that wouldn't touch some things, or the E.R. will give you a shot and send you on your way.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Farmerga said:


> Make opioids OTC. The government has no business telling us what we can and cannot put into our bodies. (and, before anyone says it, it is not their responsibility to bail us out of the consequences of our poor choices. )


How many innocent people deserve to suffer for an addict's poor choices? Because a lot are already.

There was a time of 'pill mills' and supposed 'pain clinics' that opioids practically were over the counter they were so easy to get. It was a fiasco.



Bearfootfarm said:


> You're repeating the media hype and ignoring all the warning labels on the drugs.


There is actually quite a bit of history behind Oxys. Originally it was touted at a much lower risk category 4 instead of it's current day 2. This meant the warning labels weren't as severe and supposedly there was a much lower risk of dependency.

Class 2 drugs are also much more closely monitored for how much they are prescribed and the inventory is managed with much greater security in pharmacies. It used to be you could 'pick it up for your mom' from the pharmacy, but now your mother has to go herself and show id to get it.

When Oxycontin became category 2 and monitored it blew the lid off of how bad pill mills were churning the stuff out.

https://medshadow.org/resource/drug-classifications-schedule-ii-iii-iv-v/

Months back I read a great article on all the slimy stuff the manufacturers pulled between lobbying and cherry picking studies to get oxycontin on the market and how they originally marketed it. I'll try to dig it up.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> I have been in the medical field for 27 years now....NEVER have I heard a dr tell anyone that oxycontin was not addictive. I have had to be on it a few times in my life, just recently for two surgeries a year apart. Each time the dr went over the warning's and had me relay back to them I understood, there were no refill's on the prescription and I had to come back to the office in 10 to 14 days for a follow up appointment.
> 
> The town I am in, we have a high rate of addicts due to medication and meth. Many scream they want rehab facilities built as their loved one "needs" the help. None of them will man up and show any personal responsibility for their actions, you talk to them and they will come up with 101 excuses why it is NOT their fault, but everyone and everything else around them. I don't want my hard earned tax dollars to go to a facility that these people will go in for a short time, think they are cured and right out they go to repeat the cycle, or state they didn't know. Yea okay.
> 
> Now, anyone going to a medical facility and needing pain meds, it is going to be like pulling teeth due to those who have addictions and are suing doctors for their family members issues or screaming it is the medical facilities problem or fault. Anyone who needs pain meds, are told Tylenol or Aleve, something that wouldn't touch some things, or the E.R. will give you a shot and send you on your way.


So as a long term aid in the medical field, we should just let addicts die rather than provide treatment because they relapse? How about cancer patients if the cancer comes out of remission? Mental illness? Many relapses. Taking it further- Alzheimer's? ALS? Those people are never going to get better, do they deserve treatment?

I loathe paying for people that smoked, drank, and didn't take care of their bodies and now want everyone to pay for their lifestyle choice. I do because we are a first world country that doesn't allow people to die of treatable diseases, it's what people in a society do.

And it's been proven that Perdue Pharma mislead, understated, and twisted the information to physicians when they first released their opioid in the 1990s. Everyone that hasn't lived under a rock for at least the last ten years knows the addiction is real and dangerous now. The reason for the lawsuit is fraud when releasing the original information.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Prismseed said:


> How many innocent people deserve to suffer for an addict's poor choices? Because a lot are already.
> 
> There was a time of 'pill mills' and supposed 'pain clinics' that opioids practically were over the counter they were so easy to get. It was a fiasco.


How many innocent people deserve to suffer for an alcoholic's poor choices? A smoker's? An idiot's? A lot are already.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Farmerga said:


> How many innocent people deserve to suffer for an alcoholic's poor choices? A smoker's? An idiot's? A lot are already.


Wow, you really don't know how detrimental an opioid addict is to the community, or how many there are out there.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Prismseed said:


> Wow, you really don't know how detrimental an opioid addict is to the community, or how many there are out there.


Prismseed...not being argumentative, but...what would be the solution to this? Should these addicts not have any personal responsibility to this epidemic? What should be said to those who have to fight to get proper pain meds and can't because of the tightening of the stronger Class II drugs?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Prismseed...not being argumentative, but...what would be the solution to this? Should these addicts not have any personal responsibility to this epidemic? What should be said to those who have to fight to get proper pain meds and can't because of the tightening of the stronger Class II drugs?


Anyone can get Schedule IIN medication within the set DEA guidelines, it's harder to get large quantities now. 

Of course people should responsible for their addiction, but they do deserve treatment just like every other human being.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Prismseed said:


> Wow, you really don't know how detrimental an opioid addict is to the community, or how many there are out there.


I have a good idea, it is simply not the place of the government to tell us what we can and cannot put into our bodies. Deal with those who endanger others, not the substance itself. Like most limited/prohibited substances, much of the crime associated with them is because of the prohibition.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I will admit I had never heard of Oxycontin until I watched the TV show "Justified", so I don't really have a valid opinion on it.
I am lead to understand that many of the addicts are not prescription holders?


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Anyone can get Schedule IIN medication within the set DEA guidelines, it's harder to get large quantities now.
> 
> Of course people should responsible for their addiction, but they do deserve treatment just like every other human being.


In our ER, hospitals and clinics it is hard to get ANY strong pain meds that are not the basics I already mentioned and you have to be at deaths doors. I wasn't talking about the quantity, just getting them.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> In our ER, hospitals and clinics it is hard to get ANY strong pain meds that are not the basics I already mentioned and you have to be at deaths doors. I wasn't talking about the quantity, just getting them.


That's not true, if a physician determines pain medication is needed (and there are no issues on the drug registry with the patient's name) pain medication will be ordered. From what I've heard from ER NPs it's easier to get pain meds as an emergency because it's one time, and followup is with the primary. 

Are there more regs? Absolutely. Does it take longer to get refills? Absolutely. But people that need pain relief are still getting their medication and they always will.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> That's not true, if a physician determines pain medication is needed (and there are no issues on the drug registry with the patient's name) pain medication will be ordered. From what I've heard from ER NPs it's easier to get pain meds as an emergency because it's one time, and followup is with the primary.
> 
> Are there more regs? Absolutely. Does it take longer to get refills? Absolutely. But people that need pain relief are still getting their medication and they always will.


Irish Pixie....I am telling you what WE in VIRGINIA face...not sure how you know what is true or not here....your in California yes? It is A LOT harder to get any stronger pain meds from any doctor around here due to our problem with addiction and over doses.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Irish Pixie....I am telling you what WE in VIRGINIA face...not sure how you know what is true or not here....your in California yes? It is A LOT harder to get any stronger pain meds from any doctor around here due to our problem with addiction and over doses.


Federal law regulates controlled substances, not state.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Federal law regulates controlled substances, not state.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Grey Mare said:


> Should these addicts not have any personal responsibility to this epidemic?


Oh they should, but they could be responsible for the rest of their lives and it will never pay for the damage done. The companies raking in money hand over fist should be made to pay something.



Grey Mare said:


> What should be said to those who have to fight to get proper pain meds and can't because of the tightening of the stronger Class II drugs?


Prescribing needs restructuring. I had a friend given a prescription for Oxy for a sprained ankle. They also need to change the dosing method. Oxycontin's big selling point is that it lasts 8-12 hours, insurance loves it because hey less pills to pay for. But doctor studies suggest it is more practical to use 4-6 hours (because is doesn't knock the pain out for a full 12 hours) the 8-12 hour method is actually believed to foster addiction as the drug wears off at 6 hours and the patient spends the remaining time in pain, craving the drug, and then getting the feeling of satisfaction when they finally take it and the pain goes away. On a bad day they take the medicine early, after enough bad days the prescription runs out days before it can be refilled, so they go to a drug dealer for more.

It has become more common practice recently, but patients need to be tapered off. You can't just stop taking a high dosage. Keep in mind this stuff is addictive enough people turn to heroine rather than quit cold turkey.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Cornhusker said:


> I am lead to understand that many of the addicts are not prescription holders?


Some, some are 'not current prescription holders'. Doctors used to hand out prescriptions like candy. A former friend was prescribed them for lyme disease related pain. Before that he served in the army and was a 5 star chef. Now he is divorced and on probation.

Also keep in mind before the clamp down there was 'pill mill' doctors. They only accepted cash, no insurance and did walk in appointments.






A documentary I watched years back said that the average recovery rate from opioid addiction was less than 10%.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Prismseed said:


> Some, some are 'not current prescription holders'. Doctors used to hand out prescriptions like candy. A former friend was prescribed them for lyme disease related pain. Before that he served in the army and was a 5 star chef. Now he is divorced and on probation.
> 
> Also keep in mind before the clamp down there was 'pill mill' doctors. They only accepted cash, no insurance and did walk in appointments.
> 
> ...


Interesting documentary Prismseed, thank you for posting. Here too they have already arrested a few doctor's in our area who were pill milling as you said. One was well known, yanked his license and he lost everything.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

elevenpoint said:


> Don't have an answer
> Watch an opioid addict not be able to find their prescription bottle by noon
> Frightening


Watch my daughter writhe and scream on the floor in pain (from her actual genetic medical condition that is incurable and causes constant chronic, severe pain) as we wait for the insurance company to approve a new medication to desperately try to take the edge off that they've already denied three times because it's in the opioid class and some *&%$head junkies want to abuse it for recreation, so they deny everyone now. You get to fight for weeks to get it approved, weeks that the person that needs it is in (sometimes excruciating) pain. (I would have paid out of pocket but, lucky her, it's illegal to pay out of pocket on the insurance she had at the time). 

I have very little sympathy for addicts. Some days I wish for a magic power that would transfer what my daughter goes through onto them so that they would at least have a reason for ruining it for people who actually need pain killers.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Also forgot to add how it's affecting pain management clinics. It's getting to be impossible to find one around there that even prescribes anything - most of them are going to "trigger point therapy" which is questionable (and useless in my daughter's case) for anyone with long-term chronic pain.


----------



## Elevenpoint (Nov 17, 2009)

Mish said:


> Watch my daughter writhe and scream on the floor in pain (from her actual genetic medical condition that is incurable and causes constant chronic, severe pain) as we wait for the insurance company to approve a new medication to desperately try to take the edge off that they've already denied three times because it's in the opioid class and some *&%$head junkies want to abuse it for recreation, so they deny everyone now. You get to fight for weeks to get it approved, weeks that the person that needs it is in (sometimes excruciating) pain. (I would have paid out of pocket but, lucky her, it's illegal to pay out of pocket on the insurance she had at the time).
> 
> I have very little sympathy for addicts. Some days I wish for a magic power that would transfer what my daughter goes through onto them so that they would at least have a reason for ruining it for people who actually need pain killers.


Your daughter and others that have that need should not be restricted in any way
I was talking about a basic addict that got a prescription when there was really no need and didn't need the medication for pain but the withdrawl was so bad by noon


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

NC passed a more strict law last year. What the article doesn't address is the system also monitors how many times a Dr prescribes pain meds and certain amounts trigger audits no matter the reason for the prescription. The Drs don't have time for the auditors so they just stopped giving the pain killers in many cases.

This was brought to my attention during a friend's wait to get into surgery to replace a hip. He had to wait 5 months for his surgeon to get an opening. And no opioid pain meds pre-surgery but was given them post when the pain was relieved. 

The state laws have changed the way the Drs treat patients whether intentional or not. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BhAB&usg=AOvVaw0kASjSE-J5esRZ78TJpkw7&ampcf=1


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

elevenpoint said:


> Your daughter and others that have that need should not be restricted in any way
> I was talking about a basic addict that got a prescription when there was really no need and didn't need the medication for pain but the withdrawl was so bad by noon


I'm sorry, I realize that sounded like I was arguing with you. I wasn't. I just want people (everyone?) in general to realize that the opioid issue isn't all about the addicts, even though that's the way it's spun all over the place. And, because of that, people who really do need the medication to not kill themselves are being severely harmed.

Wasn't meant as a debate with you, sorry about that - you just made a good comment for me to jump on my soapbox lol


----------



## Elevenpoint (Nov 17, 2009)

Mish said:


> I'm sorry, I realize that sounded like I was arguing with you. I wasn't. I just want people (everyone?) in general to realize that the opioid issue isn't all about the addicts, even though that's the way it's spun all over the place. And, because of that, people who really do need the medication to not kill themselves are being severely harmed.
> 
> Wasn't meant as a debate with you, sorry about that - you just made a good comment for me to jump on my soapbox lol


No problem
There is a need for many and that should not be restricted
Those that are addicts pretty much know it
What I see is they justify it because it's legal vs getting them on the street
More of a my doctor says it's ok so it's all good


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

nchobbyfarm said:


> NC passed a more strict law last year. What the article doesn't address is the system also monitors how many times a Dr prescribes pain meds and certain amounts trigger audits no matter the reason for the prescription. The Drs don't have time for the auditors so they just stopped giving the pain killers in many cases.
> 
> This was brought to my attention during a friend's wait to get into surgery to replace a hip. He had to wait 5 months for his surgeon to get an opening. And no opioid pain meds pre-surgery but was given them post when the pain was relieved.
> 
> ...


Over the last year or so, after moving, I was looking for a new doctor. One of the standard messages I got when I would call about setting up an appointment was "Dr. So & So does not prescribe certain classes of pain medication." I can't remember the exact words. I was taken aback when I heard that. Maybe what you are saying explains why they say that.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

This is just one more example of why corporations must be strickly regulated. They exist to feed stockholders at the expense of everything we value.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> And* it's been proven* that Perdue Pharma mislead, understated, and twisted the information to physicians when they first released their opioid in the 1990s.


Show us that "proof".


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Prismseed said:


> *When Oxycontin became category 2* and monitored it blew the lid off of how bad pill mills were churning the stuff out.


That was about 50 years ago.
The drug has been around over 100 years.
It's really got little to do with the current time.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That was about 50 years ago.


Oops, must have accidentally blended some other drug instances together. Sorry about that.




Bearfootfarm said:


> The drug has been around over 100 years.


-Oxycodone- has been around for 100 years. Oxycontin is a different compound that contains Oxycodone. It was originally sold as the 'safer less addictive alternative' as every historically addictive opioid has been sold for hundreds of years.



> Oxycodone first came to the U.S. in 1939, but it wasn't until Purdue Pharma began *manufacturing* OxyContin in the United States in 1996 that it became *widely* used.


https://www.treatmentsolutions.com/the-history-of-oxycontin/


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Prismseed said:


> It was originally sold as the 'safer less addictive alternative' as every historically addictive opioid has been sold for hundreds of years.


Those statements are true when used *as directed.*
They don't apply when people start taking them for fun or take more than they need.

Many of the current *overdose* problems are from Fentanyl and other counterfeit drugs.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Those statements are true when used *as directed.*


But it doesn't work for 12 hours like it claims.

https://www.jwatch.org/fw111543/2016/05/09/oxycontin-fails-deliver-12-hours-pain-relief-many

http://www.latimes.com/projects/oxycontin-part1/#nt=oft07a-2gp1



> A separate study underwritten by a Purdue competitor, Janssen Pharmaceutica, reached a similar conclusion. Researchers surveyed chronic pain patients treated with OxyContin and reported that *less than 2% said the drug lasted 12 hours* and *nearly 85% said it wore off before eight*, according to a 2003 journal article detailing the research.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Prismseed said:


> But it doesn't work for 12 hours like it claims.


No drug works the same on everyone.
Nothing I said has anything to do with that anyway.

I'm not going to put too much faith in a "study" by one of their competitors.


----------



## Oregon1986 (Apr 25, 2017)

Anything has the chance of becoming addictive. I for one have nothing against oxy,it helped me with the pain after each of my C-section and hernia surgeries


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No drug works the same on everyone.


Well when you're dealing with a drug as addictive as heroine and meant to cope with pain on the level of terminally ill cancer it should probably be a bit more reliable.



Bearfootfarm said:


> I'm not going to put too much faith in a "study" by one of their competitors.


Then by all means site the best study you can find. Bonus points if it isn't one funded by Purdue.


----------



## gerold (Jul 18, 2011)

Grey Mare said:


> Irish Pixie....I am telling you what WE in VIRGINIA face...not sure how you know what is true or not here....your in California yes? It is A LOT harder to get any stronger pain meds from any doctor around here due to our problem with addiction and over doses.


Depends on what doctor or hospital one goes to here. The doctors that give a lot of feel good pills are well known to most people here. At the V.A. here they pass out pain pills like candy.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

When I had my bypass a few years ago, they put me on oxycodone.
When I got my wits about me, I told them I didn't need it and just took Tylenol.
I'm kind of suspicious of those strong pain pills.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Prismseed said:


> Then by all means site the best study you can find. Bonus points if it isn't one funded by Purdue.


You claimed:


> Oxycodone first came to the U.S. in 1939, but it wasn't until Purdue Pharma began *manufacturing *OxyContin in the United States in 1996 that it became *widely* used.


The truth is it was being "widely used" even in the 70's, largely marketed as Percocet.
The current "opioid epidemic" is more due to Fentanyl than OxyCotin and widely hyped by the media

Blaming the drug company for addicts is like blaming Ford for drunk drivers.
Drug addiction is nothing new in the world.
The media frenzy and drug du jour is all that really changes.

Methamphetamines were going to ruin the country shortly after WWII
In the 60's it was "diet pills" (Mother's Little Helper)
In the 70's it was Acid and Heroin
In the 80's it was crack cocaine.
Now it's cycled back around, with no more solutions than before.

The lawsuits are just lawyers looking for a payday.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You claimed:
> 
> The truth is it was being "widely used" even in the 70's, largely marketed as Percocet.
> The current "opioid epidemic" is more due to Fentanyl than OxyCotin and widely hyped by the media
> ...


Nope. Can you cite all this "truth"? Or will you just admit it's your opinion? And some of it is incorrect.

Oxycontin is a fairly new drug, it's not the same formulary as oxycodone. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/oxycontin-treatment/vs-oxycodone/

Perocet is not the same formulary as Oxycontin. Same link. 

Blaming Perdue for *fraudulently* indicating that Oxycontin with it's extended release formula was less addicting is something that will addressed with the lawsuit(s) being filed by the states. 

Mother's little helper was Valium, it's class is benzodiazepine, and it's a sedative not a diet pill. 

The rest of your post is simply opinion or parroting or whatever, in my opinion.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Blaming Perdue for *fraudulently* indicating that Oxycontin with it's extended release formula was less addicting is something that will addressed with the lawsuit(s) being filed by the states.


I don't care what lawyer's claim in a lawsuit. They lie for money. Some lie from habit.



Irish Pixie said:


> Mother's little helper was Valium, it's class is benzodiazepine, and it's a sedative not a diet pill.


They needed the sedatives to sleep after taking all the diet pills to keep themselves from getting fat. Read "Valley of The Dolls". There were lots of things going on then.



Irish Pixie said:


> The rest of your post is simply opinion or parroting or whatever, in my opinion.


Do you know the meaning of "on topic"?
Why must you make it personal?
LOL



Irish Pixie said:


> Oxycontin is a fairly new drug, it's not the same formulary as oxycodone.


I never said it was an identical formula.
It's close enough to Oxycodone be *considered* the same.



Irish Pixie said:


> Perocet is not the same *formulary* as Oxycontin. Same link.


You're nitpicking the recipe by playing word games, and attempting to ignore the *ingredients*



> *Oxycontin Uses, Side Effects & Warnings - Drugs.com*
> https://www.drugs.com/oxycontin.html
> *OxyContin (oxycodone)* is a narcotic pain reliever used to treat moderate to severe pain. Includes OxyContin side effects, interactions and indications.





> *Oxycontin*
> Generic drug name: Oxycodone


*Percocet: Uses, Dosage, Side Effects & Warnings - Drugs.com*
https://www.drugs.com/percocet
*Percocet (acetaminophen and oxycodone)* is used to relieve moderate to severe pain. Includes Percocetside effects, interactions and indications.


If you disagree, argue with BING.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You claimed:
> 
> The truth is it was being "widely used" even in the 70's, largely marketed as Percocet.
> The current "opioid epidemic" is more due to Fentanyl than OxyCotin and widely hyped by the media
> ...


I thought mother's little helper was Valium. Little yellow pill 5 mg, blue was 10.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HDRider said:


> I thought mother's little helper was Valium. Little yellow pill 5 mg, blue was 10.


They had lots of "helpers" back then in a veritable rainbow.

"One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small
And the ones that Mother gives you don't do anything at all"


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They had lots of "helpers" back then in a veritable rainbow.
> 
> "One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small
> And the ones that Mother gives you don't do anything at all"


I like that song too.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I don't care what lawyer's claim in a lawsuit. They lie for money. Some lie from habit.
> 
> 
> They needed the sedatives to sleep after taking all the diet pills to keep themselves from getting fat. Read "Valley of The Dolls". There were lots of things going on then.
> ...


LOL. Your "proof" is a fictional book by Jacqueline Susann? Nope. Valium has always been Mother's Little Helper, and is not a diet pill. 

Nope again. Oxycodone/Perocet is not the same as Oxycontin and your continued "considered/close enough" (that is hilarious) doesn't make it so. It is what it is and it is not the same formulary. 

You're wrong, and I'm done. Have a wonderful day.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

HDRider said:


> I thought mother's little helper was Valium. Little yellow pill 5 mg, blue was 10.


This where the term "mother's little helper" aka Valium originated.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nope again. Oxycodone/Perocet is not the same as Oxycontin and your continued "considered/close enough" (that is hilarious) doesn't make it so. It is what it is and it is not the same formulary.


Argue with the *sources* I posted that say it's the same.
They are credible. 



Irish Pixie said:


> You're wrong, and I'm done.


No, and not likely.


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The truth is it was being "widely used" even in the 70's, largely marketed as Percocet.


Not as widely used as it has been in the past 20 years. Compare Purdue's advertising and and sales revenue between the two.




Bearfootfarm said:


> The current "opioid epidemic" is more due to Fentanyl than OxyCotin and widely hyped by the media


This varies by region. Our area is plagued by Oxycontin, but we do get out of state robbers hitting local pharmacies for BOTH Fentanyl and Oxycontin.

It is an Opioid epidemic, that means it includes all opiods. Otherwise it would just be the 'fentanyl epidemic'




Bearfootfarm said:


> It's close enough to Oxycodone be *considered* the same.


Yet advertised as safer and less addictive, which has since been removed.

Keep in mind you're citing the current information on OxyContin, not the original.



> The sentence would remain on OxyContin’s label for more than five years before the FDA removed it and put a “black box warning” on the drug, signifying the drug’s serious or life-threatening risks.


https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/13/health-care/uncertain-hour/opioid


----------



## Seth (Dec 3, 2012)

HeavyHauler said:


> And replace them with what, to chronic pain patients?


Chronic? Seth


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Prismseed said:


> *Not as widely used* as it has been in the past 20 years. Compare Purdue's advertising and and sales revenue between the two.


Compare the population figures 50 years ago to now.
Sale revenue tells you nothing at all about the drug itself.



Prismseed said:


> Yet advertised as *safer and less addictive*, which has since been removed.


Those are subjective terms.
It doesn't change anything I've said so far.



Prismseed said:


> Keep in mind you're citing the current information on OxyContin, not the original.


You're citing studies from their competitors and from lawsuits.
Hardly unbiased sources considering they stand to gain money themselves.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Compare the population figures 50 years ago to now.
> Sale revenue tells you nothing at all about the drug itself.


Seriously?
Obviously sale revenue won't "tell you about the drug itself" but it does tell you a lot about how many people are using it compared to earlier decades.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2622774/


> When Purdue Pharma introduced OxyContin in 1996, it was aggressively marketed and highly promoted. Sales grew from $48 million in 1996 to almost $1.1 billion in 2000.1 The high availability of OxyContin correlated with increased abuse, diversion, and addiction, and by 2004 OxyContin had become a leading drug of abuse in the United States.2





> Purdue “aggressively” promoted the use of opioids for use in the “non-malignant pain market.”15(p187) A much larger market than that for cancer-related pain, the non–cancer-related pain market constituted 86% of the total opioid market in 1999.17 Purdue's promotion of OxyContin for the treatment of non–cancer-related pain contributed to a nearly tenfold increase in OxyContin prescriptions for this type of pain, from about 670 000 in 1997 to about 6.2 million in 2002, whereas prescriptions for cancer-related pain increased about fourfold during that same period.19





> Purdue trained its sales representatives to carry the message that the risk of addiction was “less than one percent.”50(p99)
> 
> Misrepresenting the risk of addiction proved costly for Purdue. On May 10, 2007, Purdue Frederick Company Inc, an affiliate of Purdue Pharma, along with 3 company executives, pled guilty to criminal charges of misbranding OxyContin by claiming that it was less addictive and less subject to abuse and diversion than other opioids, and will pay $634 million in fines.61
> 
> Although research demonstrated that OxyContin was comparable in efficacy and safety to other available opioids,11,63 marketing catapulted OxyContin to blockbuster drug status. Sales escalated from $44 million (316 000 prescriptions dispensed) in 1996 to a 2001 and 2002 combined sales of nearly $3 billion (over 14 million prescriptions).19


The other facts I find interesting are that cautions given to pregnant and women who breast feed and the list of side effects.
Why be concerned about infants if the chance of addiction is so small?

And if you're supposed to take this pill with food (as directed) how can you do that while having loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> *Obviously sale revenue won't "tell you about the drug itself"* but it does tell you a lot about how many people are using it compared to earlier decades.


That's what I said.
"More people using it now" is also a meaningless comparison simply because there *are* a lot more people now. 

Your source is over 10 years old too. 
It's really nothing more than one man's opinions and we don't know his agenda.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's what I said.
> "More people using it now" is also a meaningless comparison simply because there *are* a lot more people now.


Did you do any of the math before you made that statement?
LOL



> Your source is over 10 years old too.
> 
> It's really nothing more than one man's opinions and we don't know his agenda.


There are 6 more pages of studies on the sidebar of that link.........definitely more than just one man's opinion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed...d=18799767&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pmc

Yep, the stats today are scarier than they were 10 years ago. That's the reason for the recent crackdown on opioids.
It's a shame that it is going to cause a severe backlash on those who truly can benefit from it, but the doctors, workers comp, the VA and many others are cutting people off in droves right now.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Did you do any of the math before you made that statement?


No, but I read the *context of the quotes *and it had nothing to do with what you're talking about, which seems to be a rather common theme.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> There are *6 more pages of studies *on the sidebar of that link.........definitely more than just one man's opinion.


More irrelevant trivia as far as my comments were concerned.
You're not talking about the same things.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No, but I read the *context of the quotes *and it had nothing to do with what you're talking about, which seems to be a rather common theme.


The context?
Sales increased by a factor of 20, prescriptions by a factor of 10.............in just 5 years.
Do you think the population grew that much? 


Bearfootfarm said:


> "More people using it now" is also a meaningless comparison simply because there *are* a lot more people now.





Bearfootfarm said:


> More irrelevant trivia as far as my comments were concerned.
> You're not talking about the same things.


Let me guess.
If it doesn't support what you said, it's always trivial and irrelevant, right?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> The context?
> Sales increased by a factor of 20, prescriptions by a factor of 10.............in just 5 years.
> Do you think the population grew that much?


Yes, the *context.*



farmrbrown said:


> If it doesn't support what you said, it's always trivial and irrelevant, right?


 I don't care what it "supports" but what you're talking about simply has no relation to anything I said.

I'm not going to explain it to you if you can't bother to read close enough to figure it out.
I already told you once.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes, the *context.*
> 
> 
> I don't care what it "supports" but what you're talking about simply has no relation to anything I said.
> ...


Explanation isn't necessary, I understood what you claimed........You don't believe that the drug maker aggressively marketed oxycontin to doctors to prescribe it to patients that previously weren't recommended to take it.
You also believe the reason for the tremendous increase in prescriptions was due to population growth instead of sales and marketing, even if all the facts say otherwise.
Maybe one day someone could explain how very relevant math can be called "irrelevant"?
THAT would be an explanation I'd love to hear, LOL.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Keep thinking that if it makes you feel better.
> It still won't make it correct.


So you won't stand by your own statements?


Bearfootfarm said:


> Show us that "proof".





Bearfootfarm said:


> That was about 50 years ago.
> The drug has been around over 100 years.
> It's really got little to do with the current time.





Bearfootfarm said:


> You claimed:
> 
> The truth is it was being "widely used" even in the 70's, largely marketed as Percocet.
> The current "opioid epidemic" is more due to Fentanyl than OxyCotin and widely hyped by the media





Bearfootfarm said:


> Compare the population figures 50 years ago to now.
> Sale revenue tells you nothing at all about the drug itself.





Bearfootfarm said:


> That's what I said.
> "More people using it now" is also a meaningless comparison simply because there *are* a lot more people now.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> So you won't stand by your own statements?


Now read them carefully and figure out why your comments have *nothing* to do with mine, since you say you "need no explanations".


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Now read them carefully and figure out why your comments have *nothing* to do with mine, since you say you "need no explanations".


Reading them carefully will never explain why someone denies obvious facts.
The links have shown 3 people were criminally charged and convicted in the past for misrepresenting the facts of addiction for this drug. The company's own literature indicates the terrible problem. If you own a TV or radio or have contact with other humans, you should know the facts of this problem. The math was shown that it wasn't because we have regular population growth, the two rate increases are ten fold to twenty fold apart for the different rates.
Both of those facts are the same ones you denied, so the only thing left to explain is, why would you make such an effort to say the truth isn't true?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Both of those facts are the same ones you denied


You're still looking for the explanations you said you didn't need.



farmrbrown said:


> Reading them carefully will never explain why someone denies obvious facts.


Then I guess you will never figure it out, will you?



farmrbrown said:


> why would you make such an effort to say the truth isn't true?


Why do you pretend someone told to leave a place and not return, who then sneaks back in, isn't a "trespasser"?

There's only one *honest* reply.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're still looking for the explanations you said you didn't need.



Yep. Never said I *needed* it..........



farmrbrown said:


> Explanation isn't necessary, I understood what you claimed........
> THAT would be an explanation I'd love to hear, LOL.






> Then I guess you will never figure it out, will you?


Not necessarily.
My guess is a deep mental or emotional disturbance.





> Why do you pretend someone told to leave a place and not return, who then sneaks back in, isn't a "trespasser"?
> 
> There's only one *honest* reply.


I don't "pretend" anything.
What I have done is told you the facts, the honest facts, but you refuse to accept that as an honest answer.
I'd be much more worried about people "sneaking in" that are out to do serious harm, than those who haven't done anything wrong to begin with, but then I see things in this world a little different from you, right?
But as others have asked you this before, why do you expect answers to posted statements and refuse to do the same in return?
That's not realistic is it?


----------



## Bungiex88 (Jan 2, 2016)

This is America. You shouldnt stop manufactures from making it there not forcing them down peoples throat. Putting the blame in all the wrong places. I’ve been prescribed oxy 3 times in my life and never took 1 ever and never plan on taking any. If you want to swallow a very addictive drug and get hooked on in its your fault not the company that makes them. That would be like sueing McDonald’s for making you fat. Or sueing Lamborghini for getting a speeding ticket.


----------

