Steven May Purdue Pharma Whistleblower

Steven May reflected on his legal journey, noting that despite losing the case on a technical motion to dismiss, the experience during discovery was profoundly enlightening. His case had traversed through various stages, including a Supreme Court review before ultimately being dismissed due to what he deemed an unfortunate technicality. According to May, there was a belief that governmental pressure influenced the court's decision to dismiss the case through any available means.

May highlighted the core argument of his case, which contended that Purdue Pharma's alleged fraud in misrepresenting OxyContin's efficacy during the approval process contributed to the subsequent opioid crisis. He pointed out that had the drug not been approved based on falsified claims, both the company and the government would not have used it, potentially averting the crisis.

Moreover, May underscored his role as a whistleblower in the Purdue Pharma case, drawing parallels to other whistleblower cases such as that of Brooke Jackson, who exposed issues with Pfizer's mRNA vaccines. He emphasized that these cases shared a fundamental premise: if pharmaceutical companies had not manipulated clinical data to support false claims about their products' efficacy, the products might never have been approved in the first place.

HELP SUPPORT OUR FIGHT AGAINST ADDICTION. DONATE HERE:
https://www.patreon.com/theaddictionpodcast

 

PART OF THE GOOD NEWS PODCAST NETWORK.

AUDIO VERSIONS OF ALL OUR EPISODES:
https://theaddictionpodcast.com

CONTACT US:
The Addiction Podcast - Point of No Return
theaddictionpodcast@yahoo.com

Intro and Outro music by:

Decisions by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Source: http://incompetech.com/music/royalty-free/index.html?isrc=USUAN1100756

Artist: http://incompetech.com/