Expert says California in midst of opioid crisis

Despite major drugmakers claiming no opioid epidemic exists in California, an epidemiologist testified Monday in a $50 billion false advertising trial in Orange County that the number of opioid-related deaths, emergency room visits and hospital stays he tracked in the state were of epidemic proportions.

In the fourth week of a monumental trial, a key plaintiff witness for the state, Dr. Randall Stafford of the Stanford School of Medicine, said an opioid epidemic not only existed but that overly-prescribed opioids were the main cause.

"The data from the opioid dashboard info on death and emergency visits indicate a magnitude of harm that qualifies as an epidemic," Randall said. "The number of deaths in California and hospital resources dedicated to these issues, qualifies as a crisis."

During opening arguments last month, defense attorneys representing four major drug makers accused of fueling the opioid epidemic in California by falsely marketing its products as non-addictive, seemed intent on casting doubts about whether a crisis ever existed. One attorney told Superior Court Judge Peter Wilson, he should compare the state's 17,000 opioid prescription-related deaths in 2018 to the almost 60,000 cancer deaths that occurred that same year.

Stafford said deaths, while an extreme outcome, were only "part of the story," and that drawbacks such as reduced work productivity, disease exacerbation and homelessness were among other harms that likely resulted from the overprescription of opioids.

The outcome of the case, being tried remotely, will likely affect thousands of settlements in lawsuits filed nationwide by states and municipalities that claim Purdue Pharma and other opioid producers fueled an opioid crisis by marketing drugs as safe and effective pain treatments while downplaying the risk of addiction.

At least three landmark opioid trials, including the one in California, a trial underway in West Virginia, and a federal bankruptcy case in New York, could establish road maps for settlements in some 3,000 lawsuits filed throughout the country against Purdue, it's founders, the Sackler family, and other drug companies.

The Sackler family has tried for months to propose a global settlement that would essentially wipe out existing claims and involve relinquishing their bankrupt company and paying over $4 billion from their private estate. However, 24 state attorneys generals and the attorney general for the District of Columbia, in an objection brief, called the proposed settlement plan "unprecedented," "unjust" and "unconformable as a matter of law."

The proposed settlement will be argued this week in a federal bankruptcy court in the Southern District of New York.

Despite being the most criticized of the defendants in the Orange County suit, Purdue is not participating in the trial due to the claims against it being stayed, pending the bankruptcy case in New York. The trial has consistently drawn Zoom crowds of 150 to 300 people a day and will continue Tuesday before Wilson.

Arguing for the people of California are the Santa Clara County Counsel's Office, Orange County District Attorney's Office, and the Los Angeles County Counsel's Office.

In addition to civil penalties, the people seek $50 billion in funds to abate the opioid crisis in the plaintiff counties and city, according to attorneys involved in the suit. People v. Purdue Pharma et al., 14-00725287 (Orange Super. Ct., led May 21, 2014).