Two Courts Debunk Widely Accepted Opioid Myths
Undertreatment of pain is a real problem, and bona fide patients rarely become addicted to their medication.

Since 2014, state and local governments have filed thousands of lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies they blame for causing the "opioid crisis" by exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks of prescription pain medication. The theory underlying these cases is pretty straightforward: Drug manufacturers lied, and people died.
Two recent rulings—one by a California judge, the other by the Oklahoma Supreme Court—show how misleading this widely accepted narrative is. Both decisions recognize that undertreatment of pain is a real problem and that bona fide patients rarely become addicted to prescription opioids, let alone die as a result.
Three California counties, joined by the city of Oakland, started the flood of litigation against opioid manufacturers seven years ago, when they filed a complaint arguing that the companies they sued created a "public nuisance" by encouraging increased use of their products through a false or misleading marketing campaign. The four jurisdictions sought more than $50 billion in damages.
Following a bench trial that began on April 19 and wrapped up at the beginning of last month, Orange County Superior Court Judge Peter J. Wilson concluded that the plaintiffs had failed to prove any of their allegations. In a scathing 42-page ruling issued on November 1, Wilson said the supposedly incriminating statements cited by the plaintiffs were neither false nor misleading.
As Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, noted in a 2016 review of the evidence, "addiction occurs in only a small percentage of persons who are exposed to opioids—even among those with preexisting vulnerabilities." The California plaintiffs nevertheless argued that it was false or misleading to say that "most" pain patients who take opioids do not show signs of addiction.
That statement is consistent even with the plaintiffs' claim that one in four patients become addicted, an estimate that Wilson concluded was not supported by the evidence. "The more reliable data," he said, "would suggest less than 5%, rather than 25%."
Similarly, the plaintiffs portrayed the concept of "pseudoaddiction," which posits that doctors might mistakenly view patients desperate for pain relief as "drug-seeking" addicts, as nothing but a marketing ploy. But as Wilson noted, "this is a medically recognized term," and California law acknowledges the potential for such confusion.
The plaintiffs viewed any suggestion that an opioid "improves function" as deceptive. But Wilson thought it was "beyond debate" that opioids can improve function by controlling pain well enough for a patient to resume quotidian activities like shopping, cooking, and cleaning.
Wilson noted that the plaintiffs "made no effort to distinguish between medically appropriate and medically inappropriate prescriptions." Since both California and the federal government have determined that the benefits of medically appropriate opioid use outweigh its risks, he said, a rise in prescriptions by itself cannot constitute a "public nuisance."
A week later, the Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected similar claims against Johnson & Johnson, one of the defendants in the California case. The court said Cleveland County Judge Thad Balkman, who in a landmark 2019 ruling held the company liable for his state's opioid-related problems, "erred in extending the public nuisance statute to the manufacturing, marketing, and selling of prescription opioids."
Like Wilson, the justices emphasized the distinction between use and abuse. While "improper use of prescription opioids led to many of these [opioid-related] deaths," they said, "few deaths occurred when individuals used pharmaceutical opioids as prescribed."
The court noted that "opioids are currently a vital treatment option" for chronic pain, "a persistent and costly health condition" that "affects millions of Americans." It added that the Food and Drug Administration "has endorsed properly managed medical use of opioids (taken as prescribed) as safe, effective pain management, and rarely addictive."
That is not the impression left by the lawsuits that seek to blame drug companies for opioid-related deaths, which nowadays overwhelmingly involve illicit fentanyl. Patients should not have to suffer from unrelieved pain simply because the medication they need can be abused.
© Copyright 2021 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Also debunked: the claim that the 1.2 trillion dollar infrastructure bill contains hardly any actual infrastructure. Or that it is a 1.2 trillion dollar spending bill.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/09/false-claim-that-only-11-percent-infrastructure-bill-goes-real-infrastructure/
We generally try to ignore the former president... Uh-huh. I thought this was a "fact checking" column.
In the end, the bill authorizes about $566 billion of gross budget authority (and tax cuts), which will be spent mostly but not entirely over five years. The bill is sometimes reported as valued at $1.2 trillion, but that larger number includes funding for highways and other programs that was already assumed as part of the current spending baseline. So, because they already assumed they could spend 634 billion on stuff that ended up in the bill, that 634 billion doesn't count as actual spending, and can be tossed from the denominator when calculating the infrastructure percentage. Got it.
Generally, the bill is best described as $550 billion in additional spending above the baseline, so that’s what we need to look at when we examine the accuracy of this “11 percent” claim...
Well, about 20 percent of the new money — $110 billion — would be used to fund roads, bridges and other surface transportation programs. So, already, we are above 11 percent.
On top of fixing bridges and roads, the bill allocates $39.2 billion for mass transit, $66 billion for passenger and freight rail, $25 billion for airport improvements and $17.3 billion for ports and inland waterways. That adds up to $147.5 billion.
“Together, that is $257.5 billion in above-baseline spending for capital improvements to infrastructure that is, in almost all instances, owned by the public,
Oh good, trains.
Start earning today from $600 to $750 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generate and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life. Easiest job in the world and earning from this job are just awesome.Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this site and visit tabs( Home, Media, Tech )
For more details.......... Visit Here
Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…wWh And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.
Try it, you won’t regret it........CASHAPP NOW
I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighwewbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience masses freedom now that i'm my non-public boss.
that is what I do...... Visit Here
We need to invest in technology from the 1800’s . It’s the only way forward.
1800s?
Windmills: 8th Century
Traffic circles go back to the Roman Empire.
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company QFc now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info Open on this web Site............E-CASH
What is it with progressives and trains?
Well, they did end up becoming very "useful" in Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s.
Trains are actually a very efficient way of moving goods (and much more environmentally friendly than trucks). On the other hand, they're a much less efficient way of moving passengers, as you can't pack people into a railcar the way you can logs, or lumps of coal, or plastic pellets, which is the only way the fares would add up to enough to cover the operating costs incurred in providing passenger rail service, let alone the high capital costs.
Kamala likes them!
It is what they prefer to choo choo choose.
it didnt when ObamaBiden did it last.
We got Shovel Ready Bullshit.
The court noted that "opioids are currently a vital treatment option" for chronic pain, "a persistent and costly health condition" that "affects millions of Americans."
But if it saves one life, it's worth it to have millions of Americans suffering, and turning to illicit street drugs which could kill them, but hey, you know what they say about omelets!!!
Something is rotten in the state of Dem-mark.” - Omelet
Like with all religions based on submission to the holy cause, aka, Greater Good, progressivism requires suffering.
Ping-pong balls could determine fate of Biden’s vaccine mandate
Finally, a job for Kamala.
I'll let your sick minds run with that one.
Brandon can choke on those balls.
Is this like the NBA draft where the actual pulling of the balls is not held in front of live cameras?
????
Aww, didn't post my vomiting emoji...
Haven't heard of Honeysuckle Divine in years.
Create a narrative then sue based on lies in an effort to make off with more coin. States pillaging pharma.
Reminds me of the case when a customer sued McDonald's for over a million dollars for serving hot coffee of which he spilled on himself..... Any excuse to steal; any excuse at all.
Actually it was a woman, not a man, and she her vag was so burnt it blistered.
But she was not at all stupid, so deserves more money.
McDonald's brewed its coffee at ca. 205 Fahrenheit, which meant it was about 180 Fahrenheit when served. That happens to be what coffee experts say is the optimal temp for brewing coffee, so those championing the plaintiff in that case are effectively argue that McDonald's should serve shittier coffee just to avoid serious injury (which could be avoided equally well by, e.g., not holding a cup between your thighs as you take the lid off to pour in sweetener or creamer).
You are all LIARS. WRONG. The water was 160 F. that came from an Attorney who collected data on the case.
That is still grossly overheated to cause instant third degree burns and permanent injury.
Mc D management were REPEATEDLY warned by Employees and Customers and they ignored the warnings.
You are pathetic lying psychooaths fir attackung the old woman.
Is Mc D PAYING you to lie online?
Something else Mc D should state, you know to keep from getting sued by a snake, "Don't gulp your coffee right after it is served to you, it will cause sever burns. additionally "if you crush a just served cup of hot coffee with your fist, you will burn your hand.
most, if not all coffee, is served on average @160. It is not 205 coming out of the pot or spigot. In one min in a 8oz paper cup it will cool, 10% or more
Your sarcasm is good or your mind is poor
Next up, the lawsuits against the oil companies for producing a public nuisance. Soon to be followed by law suits against the automobile companies, Frito Lay, Papa Johns, Coca Cola, and the La-Z-Boy Corporation.
Wrong order. Oil companies have been defending against these suits for years now.
Of course. The founding principle of progressive philosophy is that anything bad or sad is someone else's fault. All humans are feeble, helpless victims. And only a righteous, omnipotent government can deliver justice.
We can’t have roads and bridges without mandates, censorship or publicly funded race indoctrination.
Sullum is so totally going to end up in rehab, isn’t he? Dude loves his drugs.
Some terms that journalists shouldn't be allowed to use anymore:
'debunked'
'bipartisan'
'without evidence'
'insurrection'
Science.
Unbiased.
I just finished watching the final season of Goliath, and while I really like it, it was also hitting on Big Pharma for the opioid problem. Having read enough here at Reason, I knew the premise of the show was inaccurate, but how many casual viewers will come away from watching thinking that Big Pharma caused opioid addiction on purpose and that regular people are dying by the hundreds of thousands?
Comming soon to Reason:
Since 2024, state and local governments have filed thousands of lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies they blame for causing the "myocarditis crisis" by exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks of mRNA covid vaccines. The theory underlying these cases is pretty straightforward: Drug manufacturers lied, and people died.
This isn't a big win for freedom, it's the court system protecting the oligarchy's corporations. Opiates OK for them to sell - for you, the common man, opium is in "Schedule 1".
You're not allowed to touch the opium poppies to take the opium medicine from them. Only Pharma. We'll lock your ass in a cage for trying to relieve pain without Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer.
An MD ' splained this to me.
Yes its NOT those who need it.
Its PILLHEADS that go Doc Shopping with fake complaints of pain and fishing for opoid prescriptions.
Blame the Pharmacys for not stopping it.
They KNOW who does it!
How would you propose the pharmacies go about stopping that problem by themselves?
Pharmacies don't sell heroin, fentanyl, or pharmaceuticals laced with either.
I have found that, in this world, a large number of people, however precious their souls, can tragically be consciously or subconsciously considered disposable by others — especially government bean-counters — because they are debilitatedly addicted to drugs. Then those people may begin perceiving themselves as worthless and consume their addictive substances more haphazardly.
Although the cruel devaluation of them as human beings is basically based on their self-medicating, it still reminds me of the subconscious devaluation of the daily civilian lives lost (a.k.a. “casualties”) in protractedly devastating civil war zones and sieges. At some point, they can end up receiving just a meagre couple column inches in the First World’s daily news.
While I have not been personally affected by the opioid addiction/overdose crisis, I have suffered enough unrelenting ACE-related hyper-anxiety to have known, enjoyed and appreciated the great release upon consuming alcohol and/or THC. I further understand the callous politics involved with this most serious social issue: Just government talk about increasing funding to make proper treatment available to low- and no-income addicts, however much it would alleviate their great suffering, generates firm opposition by the general socially and fiscally conservative electorate. Therefore most, if not all, political candidates will typically, tragically avoid this hot potato at election time.
Back in 2008, after Nancy Pelousey got hold of the purse-strings and sent the economy into the shitter, unemployment benefits had to be extended, because jobs weren't easy to find in the 0blama world.
When those extended benefits were to be rescinded, miraculously applications for Social Security "disability" payments skyrocketed. It seems that the chronically unemployed liked getting paid not to work.
So, what is the best way, and unprovable by clinical testing, to get a doctor to sign off on a "disability" claim? Chronic pain.
And what is usually prescribed for chronic pain? Opioid pills.
And, what happens when someone, not in pain takes an opioid? There is a good chance that the added euphoria can lead, for those with the propensity for addiction, to get hooked.
Honest doctors limit what these addicted individuals can get, so, they head to the street for pills of unknown content, or intravenous relief, leading to the large increase in deaths.
This was the trail that led to where we are with the "opioid crisis", and government was, as with so many of society's ills, to blame.
It's no big deal, but anyone with a modicum of reason knows evil, lying, money grabbing lawyers and politicians are going where the money is. They are causing a lot of folks torturous pain, in some cases ending in suicide.
They might as well sue the pill bottle manufacturers, conveyor belt manufacturers pharmacies, UPS
Crisis pimps