OPIOID DRUGS' LITIGATION HAS A STRONG FAILURE TO WARN CLAIM

It is no secret that in the U.S. over the last 30 years, Americans on a very wide scale have become addicted to Opioids, including such popular prescription drugs as OxyContin, Hydrocodone and Morphine, originally prescribed as pain killers. Millions of Americans suffer from pain and often resort to prescribed opioids to treat their conditions. However, they have also been subject to the dangers of prescription misuse, opioid use disorder and overdose.

Since the 1990s, when the amount of opioids prescribed to patients began to grow, the number of overdoses and deaths from prescription opioids has also increased. Even as the amount of opioids prescribed and sold for pain has increased, the amount of pain that Americans report has not similarly changed. The number of opioid prescriptions written in the United States in the past decade is staggering, averaging approximately 4 billion prescriptions per year. From 1999 to 2017, almost 218,000 people died in the United States from overdoses related to prescription opioids. Overdose deaths involving prescription opioids were five times higher in 2017 than in 1999. How did we go from a nation that respected opioids only to be used as a small part of a person's pain management program to a nation where millions of its citizens are addicted to opioids long after their utility to curb pain has vanished.

Before addressing this issue, consider just one small example of how prescriptions ordered, pills sent from manufacturers and dispensed all too willingly by doctors and/or pharmacists affected just one small town in America. During 10 months in 2007, one pharmaceutical distributor, McKesson, shipped three million prescription opioids to a single pharmacy in a small West Virginia town with only 400 residents. This couldn't have happened without an eager drug company counting its profits, never mind that they are, in effect, acting as nothing more than a drug dealing cartel, run by executives no different than El Chapo or Pablo Escobar. But they aren't alone. Corrupt doctors, some of whom take a cut of the prescription drugs' profits by selling them on the streets through their own network of local drug dealers and pharmacists willing to overlook the massive amounts of obviously excessive opioid pills being peddled throughout their community are also complicit. And finally, this flood of opioids lands in the hands of no longer pain-infused former patients who have now morphed into full blown addicts needing not only their normal "fix" but ready to easily move on to the next level needed to fill their addictions, supplied by heroin or fentanyl or even more deadly chemicals. Now, multiply this West Virginia town's pill deluge and its resulting drugged-up hopelessly addicted victims by rural towns, prosperous suburbs and large cities across America and you may see the scope and enormity of our nation's crisis...and it is a crisis! In just one year (2015), a total of 793 million doses of opioid medications were prescribed, meaning that every man, woman and child in our country could have received as many as 68 pills each, depending on the prescription.

While politicians try to understand and grapple with this crisis, the legal community is taking strong action that, while it won't help the addicted...that's the role of our health, wellness and counseling communities...can at least seek punishment and long overdue compensation from the drug pushers at the top of the opioid food chain, the manufacturers and distributors who, without adequately warning physicians, pharmacists and, of course, patients about the dangerously addictive nature of their products, with cold, mathematical logic, flooded America with pills that, in many cases, weren't needed, for the sole purpose of increasing their profits. Their motto was proudly proclaimed as PROFITS OVER SAFETY: FULL STEAM AHEAD! It has been estimated that the opioid drug business is worth over $10 billion/year to big pharma. Enter the lawyers and their lawsuits.

It seems the drug manufacturers borrowed a page from the tobacco industry and set up and financed an "independent scientists group" whose sole mission was to convince the health care community and their patients that opioids were a safe method to curb unwanted pain in patients...without warning about the dangerously addictive nature of the drugs, not to mention that other, less addictive drugs, could easily have been an alternative in a patient's pain management program. Lawyers representing towns, cities, counties and States (e.g., New York, Massachusetts) are considering a legal theory of declaring the drug companies and their opioid products a "public nuisance" because they interfere with the public's health and safety, therefore adversely affecting the entire community/county/State, etc. In Johnson County, Texas, e.g., the complaint their attorneys filed stated the conduct of the drug companies was "abnormal, dangerous and out of place in its surroundings and constitutes a public nuisance." Their complaint (and those of other public entities) contends that the drug companies conspired to unlawfully market in massive amounts, opioids whose major purpose with this kind of over-the-top marketing could only be to reach people who had no medical need for these pills, but with easy access to them, would more than likely fall into the morass of addiction. Lawyers contend that the defendant drug companies knew this, were aware of the risk to addicting entire communities, and still, WITHOUT ANY WARNINGS about the known risk of addiction, continued to push their drugs upon an unwitting, certainly at first, audience of future addicts. In another page borrowed from state and localities' successful litigation against the tobacco industry, the cities, counties and States in the opioid litigation are seeking very extensive damages to cover the costs of treating their addicted populations and for resources to prevent future generations from becoming the next generation of addicts. And, many municipalities, in addition to seeking civil damages, are also filing criminal charges against the senior management both of the manufacturers and their distributors. We can only hope that the litigation process will bring to heel the biggest drug cartel in the history of the world.

WARNING: ARE MUSK, KENNEDY, AND TRUMP IGNORING THE GRAVE CONSEQUENCES OF SLASHING PUBLIC HEALTH FUNDING?

By Dr. Gerald Goldhaber • April 14, 2025
Recent budget cuts at the Health and Safety Science Services (HSSS) have sent shockwaves through the scientific and public health communities, threatening the very infrastructure designed to protect us from disease outbreaks, food contamination, and medical crises. These cuts have affected food inspectors, vaccine scientists, Alzheimer’s researchers, and experts studying bird flu, among others—positions that are essential to ensuring public safety and advancing critical medical research. The consequences of these decisions will be dire, potentially reversing years of progress and exposing society to increased health risks.

WARNING: IS ELON MUSK'S DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY JEOPARDIZING AIR SAFETY?

By Dr. Gerald Goldhaber • March 12, 2025
As Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DGE) pushes for sweeping reforms and cost-cutting across federal agencies, concerns are mounting over the impact on critical public safety roles. Among the most alarming areas affected is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), where staff reductions may threaten the lives of millions of air travelers. The DGE, established with a mandate to streamline government operations and reduce bureaucratic waste, has come under fire for its aggressive downsizing tactics. Critics warn that essential safety personnel, including air traffic controllers, are being cut under the guise of efficiency, leaving the nation's airspace dangerously understaffed.

WARNING: WILL TRUMP'S SURGEON GENERAL SUPPORT IMPROVED ALCOHOL WARNING LABELS?

By Dr. Gerald Goldhaber • February 11, 2025
Biden Administration former Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, on his way out of office, issued a Surgeon General's Advisory calling for new warnings on alcoholic beverages related to the cancer risk from consuming alcoholic beverages. Given that most individuals are unaware of the connection that consumption of alcoholic beverages can increase the risk for at least seven types of cancer, Murthy said in his advisory: "Given the conclusive evidence on the cancer risk from alcohol consumption and the Office of the Surgeon General's responsibility to inform the American public of the best available scientific evidence, the Surgeon General recommends an update to the Surgeon General's warning label for alcohol-containing beverages to include a cancer risk warning."

WARNING: TRUMP'S RE-ELECTION MEANS A DEREGULATORY NIGHTMARE FOR CONSUMERS

By Dr. Gerald Goldhaber • December 2, 2024
In my best-selling book, Murder, Inc.: How Unregulated Industry Kills or Injures Thousands of Americans Every Year...And What You Can Do About It , I propose a safety triad consisting of three components: manufacturers, regulators and consumers. All three must function properly in order to keep us safe. Manufacturers must produce and market safe (or safe as possible) products and warn us about any potential hazards so that we can make informed choices about whether or not to purchase their product and/or how to use it safely. Regulators , by imposing and implementing necessary rules and regulations, should hold manufacturers accountable for the above stated actions and to endure that they engage in "principled disclosure" by warning us about any potential hazards and dangers associated with their products. And, finally, Consumers , especially in the absence of well-meaning manufacturers or competent, well-intentioned regulators, must be highly diligent by researching products and learning about potential hazards prior to buying and/or using them. All three, manufacturers, regulators and consumers, must perform their jobs or the safety triad may fail to protect us and our loved ones. Think of a three-legged stool that distributes the weight of a person sitting on the stool, equally among the three legs. But what would happen if we leaned heavily to one side of the stool, essentially spreading the weight that was once borne by three legs to the two legs remaining braced to the floor. Unfortunately the third leg is no longer contributing to the stability of the stool, which may actually collapse because the two remaining legs may not be able to handle the amount of weight that was intended to be equally distributed among all three legs. 

WARNING: FDA RECOMMENDS REMOVING POPULAR DECONGESTANT FROM MARKET

By Dr. Gerald Goldhaber • November 15, 2024
If you or anyone in your family has used, uses or plans to use such over the counter (OTC) remedies for the flu or common cold as Theraflu, Robitussin, NyQuil, DayQuil, Mucinex, Sudafed or even some versions of Tylenol or Advil, you may want to read this newsletter very carefully.

WARNING: SOCIAL MEDIA IS ASSOCIATED WITH SIGNIFICANT MENTAL HEALTH HARMS FOR ADOLESCENTS

By Gerald Goldhaber • October 2, 2024
In an unprecedented, but, according to many social scientists and parents, a long overdue action, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, in a June editorial in the New York Times, called for a warning label to be placed on all social media platforms. In the words of the Surgeon General:

WARNING: DOES YOUR REFRIGERATOR CONTAIN LISTERIA?

By Gerald Goldhaber • September 5, 2024
If you are one of the millions of Americans who recently purchased one of several Boar's Head Deli Products, you may have bought a product containing deadly listeria bacteria. At least nine people have died and 57 have been hospitalized from a listeria outbreak linked to deli meat, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In late July, Boar’s Head, a deli meat and cheese company, expanded a previously announced recall to include at least 7 million pounds of deli products the company says may have been contaminated by listeria amid a nationwide outbreak. The recall spans 71 products and includes meat meant to be sliced at retail delis along with prepackaged meat and poultry products sold at retail locations, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

WILL THE CHEVRON DECISION CREATE A DEREGULATORY NIGHTMARE FOR CONSUMERS?

By Gerald Goldhaber • August 6, 2024
In my best-selling book, Murder, Inc.: How Unregulated Industry Kills or Injures Thousands of Americans Every Year...And What You Can Do About It (Hartford, Ct.:PYP Press, 2020), I discuss the need for "principled disclosure" from corporations about potential hazards that could hurt or kill us. I also discuss the role we as consumers play by seeking information about those hazards and finally, the role various regulatory agencies must play to initiate and enforce meaningful regulations on industry so that they do, indeed, engage in "principled disclosure" (i.e., tell the truth). In order to carry out its mandate, any regulatory agency or department charged with the responsibility of protecting the general public or consumers or workers and so on, must be empowered to both set the safety and hazard warnings rules and take aggressive, impactful action when they are not followed. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a landmark 6-3 vote last month, overturned a 60-year old decision, colloquially known as "Chevron", which has the potential to undermine our government's regulatory agencies' ability to hold corporations accountable. What is the Chevron Decision and how could it impact your safety and well-being? In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court ruled against energy giant, Chevron, who challenged the Clean-Air Act, and instructed lower courts to defer to federal agencies when laws passed by Congress are not crystal clear. The 40-year-old decision has been the basis for upholding thousands of regulations by dozens of federal agencies, but has long been a target of conservatives and business groups who argue that it grants too much power to the executive branch, or what some critics call the administrative state. In the decades following the ruling, Chevron has been a bedrock of modern administrative law, requiring judges to defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of congressional statutes. But the current high court, with a 6-3 conservative majority has been increasingly skeptical of the powers of federal agencies. With a closely divided Congress, presidential administrations have increasingly turned to federal regulation to implement policy changes. Federal rules impact virtually every aspect of everyday life, from the food we eat and the cars we drive to the air we breathe and homes we live in. For example, the Biden administration has issued a whole host of new regulations on the environment, including restrictions from emissions at power plants and from vehicle tailpipes. Those actions and others could be opened up to legal challenges if judges are allowed to discount or disregard the expertise of the executive-branch agencies that put them into place. When you consider who was advocating for the overturn of Chevron, it does not bode well for consumers and their safety: groups representing the gun industry and other businesses such as tobacco, agriculture, timber and homebuilding, were among those pressing the justices to overturn the Chevron doctrine and weaken government regulation. Can you imagine the FDA being defanged by Chevron-influenced lawsuits to the point where tobacco could sell their products to teens or resume advertising on television, a practice banned by Congress since 1970. Or imagine OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) regulations being stripped away that protect worker safety? Or a CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) challenged on its stringent toy regulations that are aimed at infant choking hazards? Or a Department of Agriculture no longer able to inspect meat with the rigor that industry now faces? Or a NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) no longer able to regulate the safety of our automobiles, especially now as we address the feasibility and safety of self-driving vehicles?

CAN DEMENTIA BE CURED: NEW DRUG WITH NEW WARNINGS

By Gerald Holdhaber • July 16, 2024
CNN recently featured its medical expert, neurologist Sanjay Gupta, narrating a very thorough documentary entitled "The Last Alzheimer's Patient" which, over a 5 year period, collected data on the latest research related to dementia, highlighting advances in new medications as well as in lifestyle changes, both of which offer promising developments that may, in some cases, reverse or, at least stop the advance of Alzheimer's, the most common form of dementia. What is Alzheimer's Disease (AD)? According to the Yale School of Medicine, AD "is a progressive disorder that damages and destroys nerve cells in the brain. Over time, the disease leads to a gradual loss of cognitive functions, including the ability to remember, reason, use language, and recognize familiar places. It can also cause a range of behavioral changes."

WARNING: SUMMER FUN MAY LEAD TO SUMMER DANGERS!

By Gerald Goldhaber • June 6, 2024
The following story is from one of my cases. I have changed the names to protect my client's identity.
Show More