Antelope Valley Press

Two courts debunk widely accepted opioid myths

- Jacob Sullum

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 Nov. 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 such as 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.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States