Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52

Thread: Municipalities suing manuf of opiods

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    6,947
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)

    Municipalities suing manuf of opiods

    I am keenly watching to see how this goes.

    http://www.wral.com/new-hanover-coun...isis/17187926/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    13,549
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Well that's retarded.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    9,937
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    Well that's retarded.

    The city of Wilmington is the county seat for New Hanover and the county’s largest city. According to the 2010 census, the county’s population was just shy of 203,000 residents.

    But the city could be considered Ground Zero for the nation’s opioid crisis.

    Based on abuse rate, Wilmington was the No. 1 city for opioid abuse, according to a report last year by Castlight Health, which researched opioid abuse to determine how the addition was affection employers and the workplace….

    Three other North Carolina cities, Hickory (pop. 40,010), Jacksonville (pop. 70,145) and Fayetteville (pop. 204,000) landed in the report’s top 25 cities for opioid abuse.


    I kind of feel the region's pain, meth is rampant in our AO.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    857
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    Well that's retarded.
    Would you elaborate a bit, please? While I do not see pharmaceutical companies as solely responsible, I think that prescription opiods have been "pushed" way too heavily by "legitimate" entities for a while. I do not claim to know the answer, but the problem is there.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    13,549
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Because they just want money.

    It wont go into enforcement.
    It wont change anything.

    Hector will still sell his Gram Grams Oxycontin.

    Some dipshit will still holler "muh back" for Lortab when a Motrin will do.

    People will just say "eff it" and buy Heroin.

    Nothing will change except money goes to coffers for some bullshit.

    Ergo Retarded

    ETA Dont get me started on meth.
    Last edited by Firefly; 12-15-17 at 14:12.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    6,947
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    Because they just want money.

    It wont go into enforcement.
    It wont change anything.

    Hector will still sell his Gram Grams Oxycontin.

    Some dipshit will still holler "muh back" for Lortab when a Motrin will do.

    People will just say "eff it" and buy Heroin.

    Nothing will change except money goes to coffers for some bullshit.

    Ergo Retarded

    ETA Dont get me started on meth.
    Many EDs cannot prescribe narcotics now, and in our institution only certain docs can prescribe narcs, and for limited time. Anyone who needs any opioids longer will be referred to pain management.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    13,549
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Pain is healthy.

    It literally hurts to wake up.

    You dont see me baby-aching to my doctor.

    You can cure AIDS with water and Motrin.

    I cannot fault Pharma for advertising because lol PEOPLE GOTTA KNOW WHAT THEY SELL.

    Generic Children's Chewable Morphine isnt one size fits all.

    I can't fault the doctors because lol if you are literally ina bed suffering after a vivisection or nursing a broken leg then yeah an opioid would help out.

    The fault lies squarely on people doctor shopping and stealing from old peoplr and there are multitudes and myriads of laws on the books if some of these fatass investigators would look, read, and make a case.

    IF they cared about enforcement.

    Nope. Money. Remember all judges are pillpoppers and alchies and let no one tell you different.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,116
    Feedback Score
    31 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Kastl View Post
    Would you elaborate a bit, please? While I do not see pharmaceutical companies as solely responsible, I think that prescription opiods have been "pushed" way too heavily by "legitimate" entities for a while. I do not claim to know the answer, but the problem is there.
    That is practically the same argument used against guns as well.

    If it is a legal product produced for a legal reason, companies shouldn't be held responsible for inappropriate/misuse of their product. That is the reason for the enactment PLCAA.

    That same legal protection should apply to all manufacturers regardless of products.

    I agree with Firefly, it is a money grab.

    I have family members that have been hooked on that crap, it sucks, but they made the choice, they are the ones at fault, not the companies producing them.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    17,434
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Kastl View Post
    Would you elaborate a bit, please? While I do not see pharmaceutical companies as solely responsible, I think that prescription opiods have been "pushed" way too heavily by "legitimate" entities for a while. I do not claim to know the answer, but the problem is there.
    It’s where the money is. Going after the Docs would probably be more effective, but that money is probably gone on boats and boobs. What a mess.
    The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.

    It's that simple.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    6,947
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand View Post
    It’s where the money is. Going after the Docs would probably be more effective, but that money is probably gone on boats and boobs. What a mess.
    It is my understanding that part of the argument will be that the manufacturers knew from the start that their products would be addictive, a la tobacco. So with that argument, they wouldn't sue the Seven-11 for selling smokes, they sue Liggett-Meyers. Physicians are small potatoes.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •