Live data from Hacker News

OxyContin's 12-hour problem

static.latimes.com

31–40 of 376 posts

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#33

> it appears they offered a cushy job to a > government official in exchange for favorable > regulatory treatment I suspect that that sentence is legally actionable as slander, as well as being an (apparently) completely baseless claim of illegal activity.

In America, I highly doubt it, though I am not a lawyer. There was no statement of fact that was made, only at most insinuation of an appearance. Usually these sorts of cases are where one party has stated something as a matter of fact, not an opinion.

The author has no standing to know anything as fact, only enough to hold an opinion. He's simply stating his honest opinion. Whether it's true or not is not up for discussion.

It is necessary for the functioning of democracy, considering this is a public servant we are talking about who in the US has even less recourse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_per_se#Public_figur...), to hold such opinions as otherwise it would be impossible to insinuate that a public official is not acting properly, and to call for an investigation of such an official.

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#34
Richard Taite of Cliffside Malibue was on Bill Maher last night and he said that there was a study that recently (within the last month) came out done by I think the FDA that concluded that oxycontin was only to be prescribed to people for 7-12 days maximum. And he said that everyone was on board, but then the prescription drug lobby totally squashed it.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population & consumes 75% of the world’s prescription drugs.[0]

0.http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2011/Wor...

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#35
post #20
post #13

The best part of the article: "Dr. Curtis Wright, who led the agency’s medical review of the drug, declined to comment for this article. Shortly after OxyContin’s approval, he left the FDA and, within two years, was working for Purdue in new product development, according to his sworn testimony in a lawsuit a decade ago." Says it all doesn't it?

What does it say?

That the revolving doors work well.

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#36

> it appears they offered a cushy job to a > government official in exchange for favorable > regulatory treatment I suspect that that sentence is legally actionable as slander, as well as being an (apparently) completely baseless claim of illegal activity.

Not sure where you are from, but in the US we have much more speech leniency. In the US I highly doubt his statement is actionable for slander, especially since he wrote "appears" and never made the claim that a cushy job was offered in exchange for favorably treatment.

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#38
post #7

The pervasiveness of OC provided by doctors is amazing. Even as of a year ago, I went into the hospital for back pain and left with a script for two fist fulls of oxy. I looked at the doctor and legitimately thought he was trying to get me hooked. And this was at a world renowned hospital. I have to wonder if Purdue is involved in some kickbacks to Dr's who (over)prescribe.

I fractured my tibia recently and the urgent care gave me a short prescription for Percocet (which contains oxycodone like Oxycontin and also acetaminophen). I didn't end up picking it up as I don't have a car and mobility is understandably limited when you've fractured your tibia, but the past the first day the pain wasn't bad enough to need it anyway, and ibuprofen sufficed. And I am a wimpy person who does not do…

In a similar vein, I got an entire bottle of vicodin prescribed to me after having Lasik surgery. There was virtually no pain, merely discomfort similar to having a dirty contact lens in your eye, which went away after a day. I never used any of the vicodin.

Re: OxyContin's 12-hour problem

#39

> it appears they offered a cushy job to a > government official in exchange for favorable > regulatory treatment I suspect that that sentence is legally actionable as slander, as well as being an (apparently) completely baseless claim of illegal activity.

And I suspect it's the kind of thing that goes on more often than not in such cases...

(Also that one would consider troublesome someone pointing that situation, instead of the situation pointed at, is icky to me).

Post reply on HN