| (back) |
A chilling attempt at damage
control Wednesday Chilling. The word for the day at a conference last week at Columbia
University's National Center for Addiction and Substance Abuse in New
York City. Marianne, of Whitehouse Station, to crusade against the drug. Marianne, a nurse, wants the Food and Drug Administration to force Purdue to admit OxyContin is addictive. She also wants the FDA to stop Purdue from marketing the drug widely. She said Jill should never have been given so powerful a drug -- initially developed for cancer patients -- but doctors are not adequately warned. After months of letters and complaints from Skolek, the FDA in January did issue a stern "warning letter" to Purdue Pharma LP. In part, it read: "Your journal advertisements omit and minimize the serious safety risks associated with OxyContin, and promote it for uses beyond which have been proven safe and effective." The FDA had issued an earlier letter, in May of 2000, saying advertising for OxyContin was misleading. Nearly 200 lawsuits have been filed against Purdue, including some by states. So far, about 20 have been dismissed. This is what Hogen said about Jill Skolek: "We think she abused drugs." The medical examiner didn't say that. Hogen admits he really doesn't know. That's a pretty heavy charge to make against a young woman who died, leaving behind a 6-year-old son, Brian. Because Jill can't defend herself. And, especially because it might lead journalists -- like me -- to avoid writing about her mother's efforts to hold a big pharmaceutical house accountable. No one wants to create sympathy for a junkie. But Jill was no junkie. The stakes are high. For Purdue, which had $1.2 billion in OxyContin sales last year. And for thousands of people who may have died or become addicted after using it. But that wasn't the only chilling thing Hogen said. The conference featured a panel discussion that included Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general, who described his efforts to get information about Purdue. After the discussion, I spoke to Blumenthal. Off to the side. I asked him to clarify whether his efforts constituted an "investigation." He had called it "an ongoing inquiry," but I didn't want to say he was investigating Purdue, a Stamford company, if he wasn't. "Well, yes, you can call it an investigation," he said. "It might not be a criminal investigation, but it's an investigation." That's right from the mouth of the attorney general. Hours later, a message was left on my voice-mail. By Hogen. He said: "I couldn't help but overhear your conversation with Attorney General Blumenthal at the end of the CASA conference and I'm concerned that you may misrepresent something he said tomorrow which involves the correspondence between Purdue and the attorney general's office. "There is no investigation under way. I think what he told you was that there was an investigative effort, and what that means is that he has written a letter and asked us for some documents and our marketing plans for the last few years, samples of ads and marketing plans, which we're of course providing to him. We've already provided these to several newspapers in Florida. We're happy to provide them to our attorney general. "But that does not constitute an investigation, and that would be inaccurate for you to report tomorrow that the attorney general of Connecticut has launched an investigation of Purdue Pharma. "I do not think that's what he meant. I heard him say it, but I also heard him withdraw it and I think we've asked him point-blank about this and he has told us and I think he would tell you, if you gave him a moment to think about it, that Purdue is not, there is no investigation. There is an exchange of documents that does not constitute an investigation and I did want to clarify that and I would encourage you to call the attorney general and ask for a clarification because we do not want (sic), we've asked him the same question, and he has told us that this is not an investigation. "It's a request for documents and there's a big difference." A few notes: Hogen, of course, had no business listening in on my conversation. I did ask Blumenthal for a clarification and he did say it was an "investigation." A court, not Purdue, released those marketing documents in Florida after two newspapers sued the state, which had collected them in its own investigation. And I had to think about how easily this man judged Jill Skolek and carelessly talked about her to a newsman. Jill can't leave a message clarifying what he said. This was the public relations man's sign-off to me on my tape: "Bob, I hope you take this in the spirit in which it is offered." I sure did. It was chilling. Bob Braun's columns appear Mondays and Wednesdays. He
can be reached at (973) 392-4281 or at rjbraun@webspan.net MORE SEARCHES |
| (back) |