Who profits the most from the opioid epidemic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/09/08/the-man-who-made-billions-of-dollars-from-oxycontin-is-pushing-a-drug-to-wean-addicts-off-opioids/

Ironically, Sackler wants to atone for getting millions addicted to opiods, by seeking further profits from getting them addicted to another, albeit milder, opioid, buprenorphine. Wait to hear drug sales people telling doctors that addicts may need to be on buprenorphine for years, even life. A virtual drug annuity.

Buprenorphine is widely available on the street and people can become addicted to it without ever having had heavier duty opioids. Also a prized score in prisons.

This explains why Big Pharma and the American Medical Industry will never be hurting. Financially, at least. Now, ethically, that's another issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone in the know break down opioid deaths by race?

% white
% black
% hispanic
% asian

Is it equally addictive across ethnic lines?

Does China have an opioid problem? What about the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, India?

Don't those places have secured borders? Yes, they do. Only Americans have allowed Mexicans to flood our streets with illegal drugs. And we also have allowed the Sackler Empire to destroy more American lives than anyone else.

No opioid problem in China. The slave labor is an essential component of the government's wealth.

[Anonymous]

Look up Rhodes Pharma. Sacklers at it again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look up Rhodes Pharma. Sacklers at it again.

Who exactly is protecting this criminal mob family?
Every politician who accepts $$$$$ from Big Pharma.

At least Trump didn't need to take their dirty donations. Maybe that's why he isn't afraid to attack the opioid epidemic, now killing 72,000 Americans a year. You got it, 72,000 dead Americans a year from drug overdoses. Yet not much outrage here. Why?

[Anonymous]

Shameful.

[Anonymous]

72,000 dead Americans (opioids) just last year.

WTH. Where's the outrage at the Sacklers
and the other deadly drug pushers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone in the know break down opioid deaths by race?

% white
% black
% hispanic
% asian

Is it equally addictive across ethnic lines?

Does China have an opioid problem? What about the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, India?

Don't those places have secured borders? Yes, they do. Only Americans have allowed Mexicans to flood our streets with illegal drugs. And we also have allowed the Sackler Empire to destroy more American lives than anyone else.

No opioid problem in China. The slave labor is an essential component of the government's wealth.

And we fund their slave labor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look up Rhodes Pharma. Sacklers at it again.

They should be held accountable for what they've done.

[Anonymous]

Sacklers are evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The opioid epidemic was based on a mistake. Have you heard of thalidomide?

Have you heard about the Sackler Opioid Connection?

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a12775932/sackler-family-oxycontin/

This article is blaming the opioid epidemic entirely upon the Sacklers. Sure, the drug company was aggressive in marketing (which is a separate issue in itself). But the idea that opioids aren't addictive when you're in pain, when you have no prior history of drug addiction, etc., that is the mistake I was referring to. A couple erroneous sentences in a couple medical journals, cited thousands of times.

Didn't Sacklers lie about the addictive nature of opioids? Yes, they lied.

[Anonymous]

The Sacklers did nothing but take an opioid that has caused deaths for thousands of years and tinker with it to create a new pill they could market and push on the masses to make as much money as possible and arm themselves with lawyers as people started dropping dead from their highly addictive product. They marketed it as non addictive. All of these new addicts turned to Heroin when the supply was cut and more people died. Then fentanyl started killing more people. Then they donate their blood money to places like Harvard and NYU and hang out with certain Political people. The Sacklers are responsible for this opioid massacre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who benefits the most? Post-surgery patients. I was sent home 40 hours after a c-section with nothing except ibuprofen so I "wouldn't get addicted."

White, UMC, mid-30's, and married, by the way. It wasn't like the OB was judging. He had just set himself up as some a8shole warrior in the war on drugs.

Which physician did that? Liar.

Huh? Doesn't sound at all implausible.

Ugh, this. The war on addiction has made it impossible for people with real pain to get any help. Same thing - had a c section and was not given anything. Broke my foot last year, and the ER said that they couldn't prescribe anything unless I was getting surgery. Since it was "just" a cast, just ibuprofen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who benefits the most? Post-surgery patients. I was sent home 40 hours after a c-section with nothing except ibuprofen so I "wouldn't get addicted."

White, UMC, mid-30's, and married, by the way. It wasn't like the OB was judging. He had just set himself up as some a8shole warrior in the war on drugs.

Which physician did that? Liar.

Huh? Doesn't sound at all implausible.

Ugh, this. The war on addiction has made it impossible for people with real pain to get any help. Same thing - had a c section and was not given anything. Broke my foot last year, and the ER said that they couldn't prescribe anything unless I was getting surgery. Since it was "just" a cast, just ibuprofen.

Liar. Post the name of the doctor who refused to give you anything after a c-section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who benefits the most? Post-surgery patients. I was sent home 40 hours after a c-section with nothing except ibuprofen so I "wouldn't get addicted."

White, UMC, mid-30's, and married, by the way. It wasn't like the OB was judging. He had just set himself up as some a8shole warrior in the war on drugs.

Which physician did that? Liar.

Huh? Doesn't sound at all implausible.

Ugh, this. The war on addiction has made it impossible for people with real pain to get any help. Same thing - had a c section and was not given anything. Broke my foot last year, and the ER said that they couldn't prescribe anything unless I was getting surgery. Since it was "just" a cast, just ibuprofen.

Not one single doctor would refuse to give you pain meds after major abdominal surgery like a Cesarean. You should take your lies someplace else, Sackler!

[Anonymous]

Ivanka is friends with the Sacklers.