Skip to Main Content

Hello, everyone, and how are you today? We are doing just fine, thank you, now that our shortest person has been deposited at the local schoolhouse and our official mascot has trotted off to a nearby corner for a morning snooze. This leaves us to the task at hand which, of course, involves foraging for interesting items. So please join us as we fire up the trusty coffee kettle, concoct another cup of stimulation — chocolate cherry decadence awaits — and dig in for another busy day. Hope all goes well and you conquer the world …

Purdue Pharma reached a tentative deal with about half the states and thousands of local governments over its role in the opioid crisis, but criticism by several state attorneys general clouded prospects for an end to litigation against the company and the family that owns it, the Associated Press reports. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich said the deal included more money from the Sackler family, which had become a sticking point during the recent talks. Purdue will pay up to $12 billion over time and the Sacklers will give up control of Purdue.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!

  • Concerning the FTC estimate of the cost of pay to delay, let us consider this item from the American Academy of Actuaries:
    “In 2016, the U.S. spent $3,337 billion, [ i.e. $3.3 Trillion+] or 17.9 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP), on national health expenditures, of which $329 billion was spent on prescription drugs.2
    So the $3.2 Billion USD estimated savings would be just under one penny on the dollar spent. Well, one supposes a penny saved, etc, but these numbers argue it is hardly worth some of the ‘storm und drang’ over this subject.
    Additional thought – how much is ‘double counted’ in the estimates of the impact of biosimilars (or lack thereof?)

    • Dear Observer,

      Assuming the math is correct, I get your point. Even so, as you note, a penny is saved… And for some folks, pennies add up more quickly than for others.

      Moreover, there are legal principles involved that can be extended and pursued in the interest of public health policy.

      No reason, I can think of, to turn a blind eye.

      All best,
      ed at pharmalot

Comments are closed.