corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 494

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Maine Inmate Sues OxyContin Maker
Join Together Online 2004 Aug 20


Full text:

An inmate in the Maine State Prison has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Bangor against Purdue Pharma, seeking to hold the maker of OxyContin responsible for his criminal behavior, the Bangor News reported Aug. 18.

Bracy Ashby, 38, of Lubec was prescribed OxyContin following knee surgery in 2000. According to the lawsuit, he became addicted to the painkiller within weeks, and the addiction led to his criminal actions.

Ashby was sentenced to four years in prison for holding a 28-year-old woman hostage in his home for 10 hours. He was charged in April 2003 with assault, criminal restraint, and criminal threatening.

The lawsuit seeks $100 million in damages and $800,000 in lost wages. Also named as defendants are the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, a Maine hospital, independent and chain pharmacies operating in Maine, and Ashby’s physicians.

Purdue Pharma has 20 days to respond to the lawsuit.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963