Canadians to file lawsuit against OxyContin maker

Class-action lawsuit to be filed against maker of OxyContin
Charles Mandel, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, September 18, 2007

HALIFAX — George Dellefountaine never expected he’d ended up hooked on OxyContin. After the Halifax resident was in a car crash that left him in chronic pain, Dellefountaine began using the powerful painkiller in 2004 on his doctor’s orders. He ended up addicted.

“I’m still suffering with chronic pain and nothing else works on me,’’ Dellefountaine said. At the height of his use, the 23-year-old was taking 80 milligrams of the drug two to three times daily. He’s since stopped using OxyContin, but Dellefountaine still experiences shakes, mood swings and other signs of addiction.

Dellefountaine is one of 100 Atlantic Canadians who have signed on to sue the maker of OxyContin in a class-action suit that is expected to be filed in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia early next week.

The action against Purdue Pharma will seek compensation for the individuals for their alleged suffering from their use of OxyContin as a chronic pain reliever. Halifax lawyer Ray Wagner who is filing the lawsuit said the action could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

The suit will allege that the pharmaceutical company’s executives misrepresented the drug as suitable for chronic pain relief and underestimated its addictive qualities in long-term use.

“They went past that line and misinformed the public and physicians,” Wagner said. “OxyContin became a huge economic winner for Purdue in its marketing and distribution to chronic pain patients.”

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

Randy Steffan, director of corporate affairs with Purdue Pharma in Pickering, Ont. said he couldn’t comment on any legal matters except to say that it would be his expectation the company would vigorously defend any claims against it.

The Atlantic Canadian class-action will be “partnering” with two Ontario law firms which filed a suit in June in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Their statement of claim asks for $100-million in general damages, $50-million in special damages, $25-million in punitive damages and a “disgorgement” of revenue from sale of the drug.

The latter would see any profit made from the sale of OxyContin taken away from Purdue and distributed among the plaintiffs.

Wagner said other class-actions in Western Canada may sign on as well.

If the case goes to trial, it could be three to five years before it’s resolved. Wagner is no stranger to class actions. His firm, Wagner & Associates is involved in a number of suits, including over the Sydney Tar Ponds, and Agent Orange.

The lawsuits will not represent individuals who bought OxyContin on the street where, because of its strength and addictive properties, it acquired the nickname “hillbilly heroin.”

Last May, Purdue subsidiary Purdue Frederick in Stamford, Conn. and three executives pleaded guilty to misbranding the prescription painkiller and were fined more than $634 million US in penalties. The U.S. assistant attorney general said at the time that Purdue “put its desire to sell OxyContin above the interests of the public.”
© CanWest News Service 2007

Link!

He was prescibed oxycontin in 2004 and didn't know that it's addicting? lol i guess he missed all those "hillbilly heroin" stories from the 90s

Canadians are a little slow, eh.

I really hope Purdue wins... the man featured in this article is obviously lying (still experiences symptoms? come on!) and should try apap or ibuprofen for his chronic pain before he starts whining about the horrors of addiction.

What I don't get is why he thinks addiction is such a problem. If other pain relievers don't work for him, he'd be dependent on OC even if he wasn't addicted

KissTheSky said:

What I don't get is why he thinks addiction is such a problem. If other pain relievers don't work for him, he'd be dependent on OC even if he wasn't addicted

Click to expand...

exactly! And I'm not too knowledgable in this area, but if you don't abuse the pills, and use them as directed, taper off as directed, don't you not even really get w/d's? I guess I was under the impression that if you used them as recommended - ie not getting high from them - and then tapered appropriately your w/d's would be low/nil.

You will still get withdrawals if you use them as recommended and at the recommended dose if you use them for a long period of time. But if you taper off your withdrawals won't be nearly as bad.

Physical dependence does not equal addiction though and that is what alot of people seem to be ignoring. Only a fucking idiot would take a high strength opiate like oxycontin which is pretty much meant for everyday use for chronic pain and not expect to have some withdrawals after coming off it if they used it for a long time. This guy does not sound like the sharpest knife in the drawer so maybe thats it. Then again maybe he just heard about the lawsuit and decided to cash in.

I saw another guy on the news who is a part of this same lawsuit. He had some serious chronic pain where he could barely walk and he got prescribed oxycontin for it. The drug worked and he regained some mobility but since he's come off it he wants to sue purdue because he had withdrawal symptoms coming off the stuff. What a stupid fucking cunt i hope he never get's another opiate again even if he's dying.

It's twats like these that make it hard for pain patients to get the medication they need. I suffered in agony for a long time because all the media coverage surrounding oxycontin abuse in atlantic canada made it almost impossible for me to even get tylenol 3's. Thus im a little bitter about the whole thing.

"physical dependence does not equal addiction though"

That's what I meant, when I hear a story of someone saying they're a hardcore opiate/oxy/heroin addict now and it's all purdue's fault, I can't help but think 'if you had *never* gone and gotten high, and you tapered properly, your w/d's would've been pretty easy to deal with; nevermind the fact that you really wouldn't be that addicted if you'd never taken more than your dose and never felt the high'.

I guess in many of these cases it seems as if the patient shares a portion of the blame in their own addiction. *But*, imo, if they share a portion, it may as well be the lion's share, as they no doubt knew that opiates are addicting, and if they never let the cat out of the bag (got high on them) they probably wouldn't be in the spot they are.

I'm sure there's people who never got high, were tapered off improperly, and had to deal with some annoying w/d's. But if they then go to buy illicit opiates to keep it going, how is that purdue's fault?

They make Canada look bad. Trying to get money from the ppl that were helping them.

I really don't see how you can blame anyone but yourself for being addicted to <insert drug here>, unless you were basically fooled into the addiction. The amount of cases where that would be present, or even hypotheticals I can think of, are slim and would be few and far between.

Yeah, I think this guy's claims are really bogus.

Besides, whatever happened to personal responsibility? I mean, if you're putting something (especially a drug) into your body, it's your responsibility to do the research and learn as much as you can about it. Sure, doctors and pharmaceutical companies need to disclose all of the information, but it's still your body, so it's your responsibility.

What a dork; yeah, who the fuck ever knew opiates were addictive?

*especially at his age!*

In this case, I seriously feel it's complete bullshit, people looking for handouts because in america the suit was successful (although the suit in america was for improper marketing, whereas this seems to be suing purdue for manufacturing oxy... kinda like blaming ruger for getting shot by one of their guns lol).

But lola, that's a great summation there. It's called personal responsibility. If you're an adult, and you take opiates for medical reasons, and get addicted for whatever reason, that's *your* problem and nobody else's. Even if your doc didn't properly explain the risks, you should read the package inserts of a pharmaceutical. I can't even begin to explain the research I do on any compound I use. I know soooo much about opiates, and haven't even done a ton of opiates lol.

The only time where I think addiction can't be blamed on the individual is if you had a younger kid (read: under 18 at least) with a major injury, put on opiates, not told a thing about them by the doctor, and then improperly tapered off by the doctor, resulting in heavy withdrawals and followed by seeking out opiates to relieve the w/d's. Even in a case like that, just the seeking of opiates is on the patient. They could've sucked it up and dealt with the w/d's and been clean. But at least I see a solid case of 'it's not entirely my fault' there. In cases like this, it's just bullshit. I can see a case made against improper advertising - but I'm no lawyer so I really can't say how legit I thought that case was. But to blame purdue for making an addictive substance is like blaming marlboro for their cigarettes, vegas for casinos, s&w for guns, or bacardi for alcohol.

bingalpaws said:

But to blame purdue for making an addictive substance is like blaming marlboro for their cigarettes, vegas for casinos, s&w for guns, or bacardi for alcohol.

Click to expand...

Exactly it's just people who don't take responsibility for their own actions. I mean anyone with a IQ over 50 would know that just about any opiate is addictive and will produce dependance if used for long enough.

It's just common sense.

I don't know if anyone would know how to say it like you did (producing dependence - I think a lot of people have trouble with the difference between physical dependence, physical versus psychological addiction, etc). But they certainly know what opiates are and have a general understanding you can get hooked. And furthermore, how old is that kid, one of the main plaintiffs? Early 20's? Like he didn't realize he was holding oxy's, and like he never tried to get high. Even if I give him the benefit of the doubt he never tried getting high off them once, I have trouble believing someone my age doesn't have a hint of an idea about oxy *before* whatever their doctor / pharmacy inserts would tell them after they needed it medically.

Im from atlantic canada, they over perscribe oxy's to every tom dick and harry and never mention withdrawels, they just cut you off when they think your pains gone.

Leading most people to start buying them illegally to get "healthy" again. doctors fault i think

They just give you a bottle that says 'oxycontin' and send you on your way? No tapering whatsoever sounds like a doctors problem, not purdue. No literature given with the product also sounds like a pharmacists problem, not purdue. In any event I'm still failing to see where purdue was wrong here..

Yeah, i've never heard of one patient perscribed oc here who has had there dose tapered down before they were cut off. Everyones just had their perscriptions, doctor said no refill and poof, there sick as a dog for weeks

I'd have to imagine then, that the fault / blame should lie with the doctors. It's one thing to give a low dose codeine or hydrocodone pill for a brief script (like a week or two), but to have people on potent opiates (oxycontin comes in 20mg at the lowest dose, and being time release the doc couldn't tell him to break it apart), I'm sure it would be the doctor's responsibility to taper them off. But you know what? Even if the doctor didn't taper them off, if oxy was what was truly needed for the pain, then it was truly needed. The patient made the choice, knowing it's an addicting compound (assuming that there was literature provided), that taking the pill was worth the risks involved, because the pain was too much.

You guys are all perfectly right. But I think Purdue can afford to give a hundred (most likely) poor-as-fuck maritime Canadians some of their fucking hoard. You guys would easily swallow up the cash like that if you could.

Nobody's denying purdue has the cash to fork over, it's more about whether or not they owe these people money. IMO, these people owe purdue - oxycontin has helped so many people with ridiculous chronic pain problems to live normal/semi-normal lives (although I guess they don't owe purdue, as they / someone paid for said drugs, but they should owe some thanks for introducing the product to the market).

"you guys would easily swallow up the cash like that if you could"
HARD TO DENY THAT!!! Just because someone would sue to make cash doesn't mean it's right, or it's justice. I think most people would sue for all they could if given the chance, even if they truly believe they're being overcompensated for the damages they received. I took financial aid grants for college that I could have worked for instead - but I qualified since I was independent, so why the hell not take the free cash? I would vote to change the way things are in that regard, but while it's currently in place, I'm not gonna turn down tens of thousands of dollars to make my point lol!