should give them more. and they told doctors, don t fall into the addiction ditch. avoid negatives like using the word addiction and emphasize the positive of supposed efficacy. what do you see behind those terms and what was really going on here? well, i ll give you a couple of terms, chris, devious and diabolical. what happened here is they made a decision that there was an opportunity for them to make billions of dollars off of misrepresenting these drugs, brainwashing physicians, using pseudo science and trumped up studies, and then they go even further to push back against doctors who were seeing addiction, calling it pseudo addiction, and telling them to prescribe more. they knew damned good and well what they were doing to americans and oklahomans. they just couldn t afford to stop. right. and you didn t argue in the case, very interesting and important to note this, brad beckworth, counselor, thank you for being with us as well. hey, we don t need opioids. opioids don t w
brainwashing physicians, using pseudo science and trumped up studies, and then they go even further to push back against doctors who were seeing addiction, calling it pseudo addiction, and telling them to prescribe more. they knew damned good and well what they were doing to americans and oklahomans. they just couldn t afford to stop. right. and you didn t argue in the case, very interesting and important to note this, brad beckworth, counselor, thank you for being with us as well. hey, we don t need opioids. opioids don t work, there s no such thing as pain. it s all real and we need pain treatment and different medicines, but it s about how often they re used and what they are told to doctors from these companies. now, you used a very interesting legal theory here. nuisance. when people think nuisance law, you know, for the uninitiated, non-lawyers here. they re thinking, your dog is too law. you know, what you did with your fence. how you play your music. you know, you re botherin