Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 691 posts

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#531

Post by tialaramex »

darawk wrote: post #476
shawndrost wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the reply! I am honestly not informed about this stuff and not asking to covertly push an agenda. Follow-up Q for you. What is the realistic way to prescribe opioids routinely and safely? Are there certain formulations that have been or should be removed from the market? How do we reinstate the taboo on prescribing them? For EG: I got a vasectomy recently and was told to expect a day or two of pain. I w…

np, > Follow-up Q for you. What is the realistic way to prescribe opioids routinely and safely? The simple answer is "less and with better monitoring". The first half of that was the equilibrium that Purdue intentionally shifted in the medical establishment. The cascading effects of that are what caused the modern day opioid crisis. Unfortunately, the modern-day opioid crisis as I understand it is mostly no longer re…

> Take-home fentanyl is probably unnecessary

Nah, a friend and colleague needed fentanyl lollipops at one point. You'd be at lunch and he's like "Oh I can't eat food, they had to remove my entire stomach" sucking on the lollipop, and he'd calmly explain that you mustn't touch his weird lollipop because while he can suck on it for a normal person the dose from doing so would be fatal, he'd just used so many strong painkillers for so long that it was now necessary because the painkillers they give regular people did nothing.

Weaned himself off eventually too. Amazing willpower, probably related to why he's not dead.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#532

Post by austin-cheney »

FpUser wrote: post #512
austin-cheney wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but its more common than this one example and more than what most people can stomach. The real problem is these people are sociopaths, and the next set of sociopaths will do it again. They don't care who they hurt because they lack empathy and if killing people drives up profits then so be it. If you really want to show concern or right a wrong then find a way to better criminalize violations of accepted ethic…

>" better criminalize violations of accepted ethical norms" What a load of BS. Wat's next ? Burning witches? I think we are way over our heads with criminalization already and have created big underclass of people who have no second chance because of that. So no fuck you. P.S. Sure I'd like to see many of our masters in jail for fucking up with people's lives but that will not happen

There is no criminal underclass of convicted billionaire sociopaths. What are you talking about? Of course it won't happen if we continue to permit, excuse, and enable their behavior while crying about how hard life is.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#533

Post by 0x00_NULL »

beaeglebeachedd wrote: post #441
sailingparrot wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, OxyContin is better than Fentanyl, and banning Oxy can push people to way more dangerous opioids. But before painting Purdue as a hero of the people, let’s remember that million of people were pushed to opioids through Oxy when they shouldn’t have in the first place. Purdue played a big part in creating the epidemic in the first place. People that are now pushed to harder drugs because of an addiction they got…

It's the same shit practically all the way back to opium wars. Always the drug dealers fault. I blame the patient. We've known opiates were bad since at least the 1800s, and really longer than that. What the doc said was just what they needed to hear to lie to themselves, but this is taught in every highschool.

That’s gotta be the most ignorant opinion I’ve heard on the subject. This clearly is coming from someone who has had the benefit of good health, or hasn’t had the misfortune of a critical ER visit. When I got addicted to opioids, the doctors didn’t ask me what I wanted in the ER. I got Dilauded as they prepped the OR. I wasn’t lucid enough or cognizant enough to give informed consent. During my recovery, there wasn’t an option of alternate anything - I got a lot of morphine and then oxy. I was discharged 4 weeks later from the hospital with a 3 month prescription for 120mg of opioids per day. That would kill most people.

My story is not unique. It is so common it could be a troupe. The doctors saved my life in one way, then discharged me into a hell of addiction that it took 9 months of serious determined effort to overcome.

Then, some uninformed keyboard warrior like yourself comes along and blames people in my situation? Maybe you should have read a little less Opioid Wars and a little more Current Events. You clearly know nothing about this problem.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#534

Post by BoredPositron »

Vt71fcAqt7 wrote: post #517
BoredPositron wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both edits are for clarity and don't change the meaning of the comments... and both edits are not in our comment chain. You seem to have another agenda here and I really won't entertain it anymore. We have different views of what force means. One is rather clear and the other one is nitpicking to get an agenda across. Nobody forced anyone to get vaccinated and nobody forced anyone to blindly trust medical professiona…

>both edits are not in our comment chain The first edit I mentioned is in this comment chain and the second one was in response to my post in a different chain. >Nobody forced anyone to get vaccinated Really? This is trivially false. For example vaccination was extensively mandated in several countries by law, for example some provinces in China.[0] In the US certain states require proof of vaccination for certain ac…

If your boss sexually harasses or extorts you, you take legal action immediately, you don't quit.

China? Really? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I won't delve into the possibility that you might have experienced inconvenience had you not been vaccinated. It appears that you're primarily concerned with your own interests and failed to grasp the broader implications during the COVID-19 pandemic, a perspective you seem to maintain even now. The choice was yours*.

*Except if you were residing under totalitarian regimes. Where they might actually forced you to get vaccinated.

There's a commonly understood definition of "force" among the general population, which you and op are attempting to distort by cherry-picking definitions from various dictionaries, often focusing on the less common usages found at the bottom of these entries. (If you go back and think about your china argument you might just understand this.)

As I previously stated, engaging in further discussion with you is unlikely to yield any meaningful results. bye.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#535

Post by kyralis »

presentation wrote: post #527
addicted wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d argue it’s the opposite. Look at what’s happened since Oxycontin was heavily regulated. Opioid deaths in America have exploded by an order of magnitude. There’s a direct correlation between higher regulation of OxyContin and opioid deaths in the U.S. The Sacklers have done illegal stuff. Misrepresenting the addictiveness of their drugs (well, it was immoral and wrong…it’s not clear how illegal it was). But it’s q…

Opinions like this are why I’m glad I don’t live in the USA anymore. Live practically anywhere else, where there is no opioid crisis, and this line of thinking sounds insane. Copy paste for other uniquely American issues like gun violence - the answer is… more guns?

To be fair, it sounds insane to many of us living in the US, too.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#536

Post by smabie »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #520
thegrimmest wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Loaning money at 200% interest to vulnerable people is usury and should be illegal Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (backed by bankruptcy protection) should be allowed. We're all grown ups, let people make their own decisions. Setting upper limits on interest rates simply makes it so that high-risk borrowers are unable to access credit. This harms those borrowers more than anyon…

> Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (backed by bankruptcy protection) should be allowed. Any? Can I sell my kidney? You are arguing an extreme minority opinion, consumer protection laws exist because it is not possible for an average consumer to understand all safety implications of vehicle design, house construction or a medical procedure.

Unfortunately the people who make the laws don't understand the safety implications either.

Letting people make their own choices, on net, probably is better than the alternative (and that included selling their own kidneys)

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#537

Post by 0x00_NULL »

addicted wrote: post #425
janalsncm wrote: post #398

Pound for pound, the Sacklers probably did more damage to America than any other drug dealers in history. More damage than any serial killer or mass shooter. In my mind they should be considered public enemies 1 through N. I sincerely hope they face civil and criminal liabilities for what they’ve done.

I’d argue it’s the opposite. Look at what’s happened since Oxycontin was heavily regulated. Opioid deaths in America have exploded by an order of magnitude. There’s a direct correlation between higher regulation of OxyContin and opioid deaths in the U.S. The Sacklers have done illegal stuff. Misrepresenting the addictiveness of their drugs (well, it was immoral and wrong…it’s not clear how illegal it was). But it’s q…

What are you talking about? Where was America getting their opioids before The Sacklers? Go ahead and pull a chart of heroin deaths vs. years and draw a vertical bar on where Purdue launched their widespread marketing misinformation and disinformation.

This is the largest and most deadly episode of addictiveness since the tobacco companies were marketing cigarettes as healthy. If this were a fire, you’d be arguing:

“Look, America has always had fires. Sure Purdue started fires in all 50 states that spread into the forest, but they were small when Purdue started them. Now, there is a blaze that has spread uncontrolled across the Continental US. So, obviously there were other parallel organizations starting fires.”

No. That doesn’t follow. Purdue stared the fires. They added tinder with marketing misinformation, then they inhibited any attempt at controlling it with active disinformation campaigns to confuse doctors and regulators about the root cause. Now, it’s a wild uncontrolled inferno, but they started the first fires.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#538

Post by beaeglebeachedd »

0x00_NULL wrote: post #533
beaeglebeachedd wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same shit practically all the way back to opium wars. Always the drug dealers fault. I blame the patient. We've known opiates were bad since at least the 1800s, and really longer than that. What the doc said was just what they needed to hear to lie to themselves, but this is taught in every highschool.

That’s gotta be the most ignorant opinion I’ve heard on the subject. This clearly is coming from someone who has had the benefit of good health, or hasn’t had the misfortune of a critical ER visit. When I got addicted to opioids, the doctors didn’t ask me what I wanted in the ER. I got Dilauded as they prepped the OR. I wasn’t lucid enough or cognizant enough to give informed consent. During my recovery, there wasn’t…

I've worked in the ER, held a license to work there, and spend everyday with licensed providers in addiction medicine. I assure you I have more familiarity here than even most addicts.

But you win the victim totempole height contest I guess.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#539

Post by thegrimmest »

worik wrote: post #488
thegrimmest wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that fiduciary responsibility mandates that corporate leaders do everything right up to the legal boundary in pursuit of their shareholders interests. In fact profitably violating regulations would also be the right thing to do in this case. Certainly most shareholders seem to appoint executives that do exactly that.

> corporate leaders do everything right up to the legal boundary in pursuit of their shareholders interests. Yes, that happens Those are evil, short sighted people, sociopaths, who should not be emulated

Sociopaths and other dark triad types have been the driving force in unifying and leading people since prehistory. It takes exactly that kind of person to unite tribes of strangers in order to go conquer, subjugate, and murder your neighbours.

"Evil" is immaterial. Markets and society are ecosystems, and the optimal patterns of behaviour in ecosystems are as ruthless as they are predictable.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#540

Post by zer00eyz »

Retric wrote: post #526
jnovek wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re saying “created excess demand” like the people that you’re referring to weren’t chronic pain patients. I know some of them were drug-seekers but we decided it was OK to throw chronic pain patients under the bus so we could eliminate those drug-seekers. Now, in addition to dealing with pain every day, I also have to “prove” that I’m not an opioid seeker if I end up in the ER for overwhelming pain. Because sayin…

You can directly count the total amount prescribed opioids through time and adjust for potency. Purdue Pharma didn’t just manufacture a drug. They did a great deal of behind the scenes manipulating so even people who did not seek out severe pain medication were prescribed extremely high doses. In terms of long term pain management opioids suck. People need increasing doses over time until the drugs side effects becom…

> total amount prescribed opioids through time

This... Dr were involved too!

> long term pain management opioids suck

Opioids suck. And the medical profession was complicit. For a class that is supposed to be professional and well informed most Dr's are, shockingly, not that bright.

Post reply on HN