1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP
  1. 5-HT2A
    [​IMG]

    Late last year, the Senate approved $1 billion of taxpayer money for “opioid prevention and treatment programs” as part of the 21st Century Cures Act. Yes, taxpayers are stuck paying for the opioid crisis which Big Pharma created for no other reason than to make more money.


    Once upon a time, narcotics were limited to post-surgery, post-accident and cancer pain because they are addictive. But cagey Pharma marketers, assuming that both younger doctors and patients had forgotten why narcotics were so heavily restricted, spun the lie that the narcotics were not addictive per se—that addiction boiled down to the individual person. Right. They began marketing narcotics for everyday pain and the result is the opioid and heroin crisis we have now.

    When Big Tobacco was busted for a similar scheme—lying to consumers that its products were neither addictive or deadly—it was forced to pay $206 billion in the 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. [executives are pictured before Congress in 1994) Provisions include paying states, in perpetuity, for some of the medical costs of people with smoking-related illnesses. Why are taxpayers paying for the similar, Pharma-caused scourge?

    Because drug ads account for as much as 72 percent of TV commercials and almost all media companies allow drug company representatives to serve as board members, mainstream media enables the deadly deception and pretends the opioid crisis "just happened" like the Zika virus or influenza. Recently, the New York Times said the controversy swirling around the new mental health czar was whether the opioid crisis should be treated with "the medical model of psychiatry, which emphasizes drug and hospital treatment and which Dr. McCance-Katz [the new czar] has promoted” or “the so-called psychosocial, which puts more emphasis on community care and support from family and peers.”

    Nope, New York Times. The issue is about Pharma money pure and simple. The “medical model of psychiatry” also known as “addiction medicine” is a big, second line business for Pharma. People who were totally normal until Pharma hooked them on narcotics by marketing opioids for everyday pain are now said to have the “psychiatric disease” of an “addiction disorder” and need to be treated with more lucrative Pharma drugs. Ka-ching.

    To get an idea of how lucrative addiction medicine has become, Bain Capital paid $720 million for CRC Health in 2006 and resold it for $1.18 billion in 2014. The National Alliance of Advocates for Buprenorphine Treatment (one Pharma drug marketed for addiction) unashamedly admits it is industry funded to “Educate the public about the disease of opioid addiction and the buprenorphine treatment option; [and] help reduce the stigma and discrimination associated with patients with addiction disorders.” Addiction medicine is so lucrative, Amazon may start acquiring addiction chains!

    Pharma is so camped out in the opioid crisis, insurance companies will no longer reimburse rehab facilities unless they use an expensive drug to treat the “disease.” The message of peers, patient advocates and former addicts, on the other hand, who know that more drugs is not the answer to drugs and that peer support is 100 percent free, is lost in the greed scramble.

    In covering Dr. McCance-Katz’s appointment, the Times cites her support from the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI). Is that a joke? Both the APA and NAMI are so steeped in Pharma money they were investigated by Congress.

    When Big Tobacco said its products were neither addictive or deadly it was forced to pay $206 billion in the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. Why are US taxpayers paying for Pharma’s similar deception?

    Martha Rosenberg is a freelance journalist and the author of the highly acclaimed “Born With A Junk Food Deficiency: How Flaks, Quacks and Hacks Pimp The Public Health,” published by Prometheus Books. Check her Facebook page.

    Original Source

    Written by: Martha Rosenberg, Jun 22, 2017, Why isn’t Big Pharma paying for the harm it caused like Big Tobacco?, Intrepid Report
    TheBigBadWolf likes this.

Recent User Reviews

  1. amielynn
    "Informative!"
    5/5, 5 out of 5, reviewed Jul 14, 2017
    I always knew that big pharma was out for the big bucks, but not to the extent of this article. I have always believed they and their supporters are responsible for many addictions. I hope they get whats coming to them. Thank you for the information!

Comments

  1. TheBigBadWolf
    clap clap clap.

    opioid dependent pain patients do not have a psychological disorder called addiction, the were hooked on it by dealers in white coats who now re-cycle the patients on methadone and buprenorphine.

    I'd really wanna know what the third part of this money printing game with the health of hundredthousands will be.

    Don't try to heal your patients, you can only make money when they return.
    => Addicts return!
      ladywolf2012 likes this.
  2. Dr. Amapola
    "Recently, the New York Times said the controversy swirling around the new mental health czar was whether the opioid crisis should be treated with "the medical model of psychiatry, which emphasizes drug and hospital treatment and which Dr. McCance-Katz [the new czar] has promoted” or “the so-called psychosocial, which puts more emphasis on community care and support from family and peers."

    So it seems to me that the latter option is never used because it takes hard work and requires people to work together. The former model will always prevail in a society where the majority would rather throw money at a problem than actually do something about it—from the rich & powerful right down to everyday folks like teachers and parents. Simply put, everybody loves to talk about the opioid crisis but nobody seems to want to do anything.

    If we were dealing with any other disease, the response would be totally different. We're partly in this mess because we still have stone-age-minded rich folks who know nothing about life in the real world who think that addiction is just a choice that poor and ignorant people make. ignore this while sending millions to the ASPCA and Africa to save gorillas and monkeys. On the other hand, we have unfathomably wealthy folks who ironically have an addiction to making money. So these hard-line capitalists will do everything not just to avoid bearing the expense of this epidemic, but they will find any and every way to make money off of it. Instead of actually helping—which some will claim they're doing—they will walk away from this epidemic even richer.

    And BTW, one billion dollars is chump-change to fix an epidemic in a country as large and diverse as America. It's like a 10% OFF discount for buying a $10 pizza. All of us American people have been and will continue to pay out of our own pockets, and some of us will give our time, our hard effort, and even our lives in the name of trying to fight this epidemic.

    Of course the methadone clinics are raking-in the dough in these tough times. Meanwhile a large percentage of an entire generation is sick and dying. It's ironic and ridiculous how so many Americans want a better economy but they're not willing to invest some money in healthcare. It's not rocket science; if everybody is sick, then nobody can work!

    So you say, "What the hell is this solving? You're just complaining!"
    Well, if you want to know what we average common folks can do, the first step to fixing a problem is educating people about it. Be vocal; tell people your opinions on the opioid epidemic and don't stay silent! Even if your opinion differs from mine, say it! One way we can peacefully rattle Washington's bones is if EVERYONE gets angry about something—this is that something to be angry about. If you think the opioid epidemic has nothing to do with you, you're dead wrong.
      ladywolf2012 and TheBigBadWolf like this.
  3. Lady Codone
    Because Pharma is a necessary evil in our world. They pushed opiates, sure, but they also manufacture vaccines, antibiotics & other not-very-profitable meds that we need to survive. The government doesn't want to do anything to "scare them off". A special court exists to deal with lawsuits against vaccine makers, and the funds for that come from the government as well. Pharma is nearly as powerful as the oil industry in this country, which is to say it's DAMN powerful.

    Pharma has paid a few fees for the OxyContin thing (Purdue, IIRC). But it's a drop in the bucket for them. And of course the DEA or whoever issued that statement to doctors to cut back on prescribing, which only hurts true pain patients. But that's a half-ass attempt at making right something they KNEW was wrong from almost the beginning.
  4. aemetha
    "But cagey Pharma marketers, assuming that both younger doctors and patients had forgotten why narcotics were so heavily restricted, spun the lie that the narcotics were not addictive per se—that addiction boiled down to the individual person. Right."

    This article is doing the exact same thing as the Pharma marketers, only in reverse. They take the polarised stance that it is entirely the drugs and not the person, while Pharma takes the polarised stance that it's entirely the person and not the drugs. Why is it that human beings are too intellectually lazy to consider that the truth is an interaction between the two? The simple answer is wrong in both cases here. There is plenty of evidence that individual susceptibility to addiction varies considerably and is influenced by heredity and environmental factors. Similarly there is a lot of evidence that certain substances, and especially opioids carry particular risk for addiction.

    This type of thinking is very unhelpful for anyone struggling with addiction, because cause leads to effect. If there are multiple causes, then that necessitates multiple approaches to treatment and prevention.

    Big Pharma should be punished, absolutely, but we have to stop dumbing the conversation down to just one of many factors. Dumb conclusions lead to dumb strategies to correct it.
    1. Dr. Amapola
      I can definitely agree with that.
  5. pTglobal
    Ain’t no money in the cure, the money’s in the medicine… that’s how a drug dealer makes his money—on the come-back.”
    ~Chris Rock~
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!