Re:How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune buil...
by umvi on Wednesday August 26, 2020 @10:20AM
(#24282704)
Surely 100% of opiod usage isn't bad? So 100% of the $10.8B isn't blood money? I'm sure some % of the opioids really helped people. For example, my grandpa has extremely painful back pain, and opioids were a godsend. Yeah, he got addicted, but he's in his 90s anyway, so at least he can live the rest of his life without dealing with crippling back pain.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune buil...
by bcrosby95 on Wednesday August 26, 2020 @10:53AM
(#24282999)
The cost to market and develop the drug could easily outstrip the revenue from legitimate uses, especially if they spent a lot of money marketing the drug towards people that shouldn't be taking it. So yeah, all $10.8B could be blood money.
Re:How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune buil...
by jessaustin on Wednesday August 26, 2020 @11:51AM
(#24283572)
How much "development" did it take? Oxy was first manufactured in 1917. "Opioids relieve pain and are much sought by opioid users", film at eleven. Any physician who didn't know what would obviously happen when this drug was prescribed is one whose care I would avoid.
But yeah, take all their money. The actions described in TFA obliterate the corporate veil. Frankly I don't know how they've avoided assassination attempts by the families of addicts.
Re:How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune buil...
by FlyMoreRockets on Wednesday August 26, 2020 @11:00AM
(#24283055)
Sure, there are good applications of opiates. However, from my understanding, the $10.8B number is the amount that the court has ordered, i.e. the "blood money" and punitive amount, not the total profit.