Some corporations complicit in ongoing opioid crisis

Bill Knight column for 1-17, 18 or 19, 2019

Attention to the shutdown showdown over a down payment to a pricey and ineffective wall at the 1,954-mile U.S. border with Mexico means fewer stories on costly crises in thousands of homes and communities.

One of them is the ongoing opioid epidemic, which claimed 49,068 American lives last year, according to a September study in the journal Science. The United States has about 4 percent of the world’s population but some 27 percent of its drug overdose deaths, according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. The nation’s drug mortality rate is 22.5 (per 100,000 people), says according to Michael Meit, co-director of the Walsh Center for Rural Health at the University of Chicago. Illinois’ rate is 20.7 and Illinois counties suffering higher rates are Knox (22.5), Livingston (25.5), Peoria (25.2), Tazewell (24.8) and Woodford (24.1).

“The opioid epidemic is the most important and most serious public-health crisis today,” says the Mayo Clinic.

Overwhelmingly affecting white, rural men 40 years older, according to Science, the opioid epidemic’s extent is starting to dawn on individuals and communities, despite years of news coverage and public discussions.

“People by and large still have no idea how bad things are in their communities,” Meit says.

Along with slowly growing awareness, people are beginning to link opioid consequences with wrongdoing, and more and more it’s seen as largely the responsibility of corporations that make, market and distribute the addictive drugs.

A coalition of labor, faith-based and other groups called Investors for Opioid Accountability (IOA), has formed to use corporate-stockholder voting rights to pressure pharmaceutical companies, which some say are responsible for promoting the widespread use of addictive pills.

The U.S. Justice Department found that Purdue Pharma more than 20 years ago was aware that its OxyContin was widely abused. The corporation continued "in the face of this knowledge" to market OxyContin as less prone to addiction than other prescription opioids, wrote prosecutors, who found that the company knew about "significant" abuse of OxyContin in the first years after the drug's 1996 introduction and concealed that information. Based on a four-year investigation, prosecutors in 2006 recommended that executives be indicted, but officials in the Bush administration opposed the move, and it was dropped.

Now, IOA is targeting manufacturers and distributors including opioid-makers Depomed, Endo, Insys, Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt, Mylan and Pernix, and opioid distributors McKesson, Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen. With members holding with more than $2.2 trillion in assets – including unions, churches, and government funds such as the United Auto Workers Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, the Teamsters, and the office of the Illinois State Treasurer, according to IOA co-leader Donna Meyer – the coalition is demanding that boards that run such corporations change management practices to at least avoid harm to their reputations.

“What is clear now more than ever is the need for structural, operational and cultural changes across the drug industry to address the opioid crisis,” commented Ken Hall, General Secretary-Treasurer of the Teamsters, “We're proud to be part of a broad coalition of investors whose diverse membership is committed to fighting for greater accountability across the drug supply chain.”

Illinois Treasurer Michael Frerichs added, “The opioid epidemic is destroying American families. We need drug companies to step up and take action now. If they fail to do so, not only will families across the country continue to lose loved ones, but drug companies will likely face more lawsuits, government regulations, and financial consequences in their stock prices.”

Medical-movie stereotypes tell stories of life and death

Bill Knight column for 1-14, 15 or 16, 2019

Medical films and TV shows existed long before “Chicago Med” was an idea in creator Dick Wolf’s mind, before Dr. Richard Kimble was falsely accused in “The Fugitive,” and before movies like Mel Brooks’ 1977 comedy “High Anxiety” or director Mervyn Leroy’s 1943 biopic “Madame Curie.”

Dr. Albert Schweitzer, the Nobel Prize-winning humanitarian, was born this week in 1875, a nice time to recall why Hollywood so frequently uses medicine as a formula: Doctors, nurses and hospitals let screenwriters tell stories of life and death.

Youngstown State University professor Rick Shale decades ago cited five reasons: Healing is a natural subject for drama and suspense; the doctor character is versatile, fitting most genres; the medical profession is easily understood; doctors have status, letting stories easily move through various situations; and historically, they make money.

Doctors? How about Dr. Caligari, Dr. Dolittle, Dr. Jekyll, Dr. Who and Dr. X. (And don’t forget the Three Stooges’ “Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard...”)

There have been comedies and dramas, biographies and thrillers, medical heroes and villains: “Men in White” and “Green for Danger”; “The Doctor,” “The Surgeon” and “The Student Nurses”; “Bikini Med School” and “Candy Stripe Nurses”; “Coma,” “Contagious” and “Flatliners”; “Extreme Measures” and “Desperate Measures.”

Dramatized lives have included Schweitzer, Alfred Blalock, Bennet Omalu and Ben Carson.

Series focused on Dr. Kildare, Ben Casey and more. Bad-guys docs? “The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse,” Dr. Phibes, Dr. Cyclops and, of course, Dr. Frankenstein.

Funny? There’s “Critical Condition” and “The Disorderly Orderly,” “Doc Hollywood” and “Dr. Detroit.”

“Crazy”? Try “Shock Corridor,” “Snake Pit,” “Three Faces of Eve” and “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest.”

TV series have included “ER,” “Scrubs,” “St. Elsewhere,” “Trapper John M.D.,” “Marcus Welby, M.D.,” “Emergency” and “Medic.”

The shows all use many of several medical stereotypes: the country doctor, the devoted researcher, the God-like healer, the mad scientist, the idealistic medical student or intern, the quack, the superficial specialist (Beverly Hills plastic surgeon, Park Avenue therapist, etc.), the bureaucrat, the substance abuser, the greed-head, the nurse as sex object or doctor as stud (men wrote most of these scripts).

Other filmmakers who’ve done medical shows include John Ford (1933’s “Dr. Bull”), George Stevens (1940’s “Vigil in the Night”), Stanley Kramer (1955’s “Not as A Stranger”), and Michael Crichton (1971’s “Andromeda Strain,” among others).

Here’s a dozen top medical films available on video, online and on-demand:

“Arrowsmith” (1931). Director John Ford had an exceptional cast when he filmed Sinclair Lewis’ novel about a young doctor tempted by money. It stars Ronald Colman and features Myrna Loy and Helen Hayes.

“Awakenings” (1990). One of Robin Williams’ early efforts at serious acting, this was directed by the late Penny Marshall and stars Robert DeNiro and Max von Sydow.

“The Citadel” (1938). Great acting from Robert Donat, Rex Harrison and Rosalind Russell highlight this King Vidor film about a Scottish physician who relinquishes his goals of healing the poor by serving wealthy patients.

“The Hospital” (1971). Writer Paddy Chayefsky penned a remarkable, Oscar-winning dark comedy set at a New York medical center. George C. Scott stars, with Diana Rigg.

“The Interns” (1962). A big-screen soap opera, this foreshadowed shows like 1982’s “Young Doctors In Love,” etc. It stars Cliff Robertson, Stefanie Powers, Buddy Ebsen and Telly Savalas.

“Magnificent Obsession” (1954). Rock Hudson stars as a boozing cad whose reckless driving causes Jane Wyman to go blind, and whose regret leads him to become a surgeon – to restore her sight. Agnes Moorehead and Barbara Rush co-star.

“Outbreak” (1995). A virus threatening California seems to be the same as a military medical man (Dustin Hoffman) found in Africa. The film features Morgan Freeman, Rene Russo and Cuba Gooding Jr.

“Panic in The Streets” (1950). This stars Richard Widmark and Paul Douglas as investigators trying to find a murderer infected with bubonic plague. Directed by Elia Kazan, it’s a blend of medical drama and film noir, co-starring Jack Palance and Zero Mostel.

“Patch Adams” (1998). Based on a real physician with innovative approaches to health care, this fine Robin Williams vehicle co-stars Philip Seymour Hoffman.

“The Story of Louis Pasteur” (1936). The great Paul Muni has the title role in this biography of the 19th century scientist who promoted vaccinations. It features Porter Hall and Fritz Lieber.

“The Story of Dr. Wassell” (1944). Gary Cooper portrayed the World War II doctor who transported wounded soldiers through Japanese-held territory. Directed by Cecil B. DeMille, it co-stars Larraine Day.

“Whose Life Is It Anyway?” (1981). John Cassavetes and Christine Lahti portray doctors in this gripping drama that deals with the “right to die.” Richard Dreyfuss stars in director John Badham’s drama, featuring Kenneth McMillan and Bob Balaban.

Pelosi shows promise in working with factions

Bill Knight column for 1-10, 11 or 12, 2019

The Speaker of the House job has been like herding cats at least since Republican John Boehner tried corralling Tea Partiers. Now Nancy Pelosi faces steering a new group of cats – wildcats, thankfully – who make up a fourth of the 235-member chamber.

She seems capable.

There’s much to find disagreeable with Pelosi, but I don’t dislike her. I do respect her.

After all, politics can be about personalities as much as policies, and her characterization as a weak leader unable to deal with the demands of an expanding Democratic Party, a contracting GOP, and Donald Trump in the White House is unfair stereotyping. For starters, despite years of over-the-top criticism by the Right wing, resulting in her 34-percent approval rating, she’s still more popular than other Congressional leaders, according to polls that peg Chuck Schumer at 29 percent, Mitch McConnell at 27 percent and Kevin McCarthy at 19 percent.

More significantly, Pelosi is demonstrating her willingness to get down to business by standing up to Trump, working with various party factions (even those with whom she differs), and helping draft House Resolution 1: the “For the People Act.”

After weeks of questions about Pelosi’s suitability as Speaker, the California Congresswoman was elected and remains resolute in defying Trump’s tantrum shutting down government until he’s given $5.7 billion as a down-payment for a wall he repeatedly promised Mexico would pay for.

“Political reform will be the first order of business for the Democratic House,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21. “Pelosi announced an unprecedented package of reforms designed to repair our broken political system and strength our democracy.”

H.R. 1 would protect the right to vote by tightening election security, expanding voter registration and improving access to voting options; make campaign contributions more public and less influential; and “will make sure that public servants actually serve the public,” as sponsors David Cicilline (D-R.I.) and John Sharbanes (D-Md.) said in an essay in The Hill.

It also would require presidential candidates to disclose 10 years of tax returns.

“H.R. 1 is a no-brainer for anyone who actually cares about American democracy,” said Morris Pearl, chair of Patriotic Millionaires. “It not only works to remove dark money from our political system to ensure every American has the same political power as millionaires like me, it also strengthens our democracy by making it easier to vote, limiting gerrymandering, and cracking down on corruption.”

First Speaker in 2007 – the first woman in the position – Pelosi is appeciateded as helping pass the Affordable Care Act in 2009 and as an able fund-raiser. Apart from her skilled politicking for Speaker, she’s leading a House in a frenzy of activity and working with the Congressional Black Caucus, the business-oriented New Democrat Coalition, the conservative “Blue Dogs” and the Progressive Caucus. (Strengthened by 10 new members, Progressives now have 90+ members, including Reps. Danny Davis and Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, Representatives Joe Kennedy III and John Lewis, plus freshmen lawmakers Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib.

Differences emerged last week about new rules, especially a “pay-as-you-go” mandate requiring a point of order against bills that raise the deficit or reduce a surplus. Some progressives see that as an obstacle to new programs.

“This is in no way a voter against the leadership,” said U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). “This is a vote against austerity economics that has caused great harm to middle-class and working families, [and] I don’t think we need to handcuff ourselves in ways that Republicans never have.”

Republicans waived the law in 2017 to pass a tax bill adding $1.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years.

The new rules passed 234-197.

Also, Pelosi declined to make the sweeping Green New Deal idea a priority, but she did appoint a Select Committee on Climate Change that may take up some of its components.

Democrats are empowered to do a lot. They can disclose Trump’s hidden tax returns, for one. Other investigations the House and its committees can undertake include questions of ethical missteps by officials, contacts between foreign agents and the Trump Organization, the “revocable trust” Trump’s family has to continue the president’s private business operations, financial dealings with other countries, and lease arrangements involving Trump International Hotel Washington (the old Post Office).

Newcomers are enthusiastic to begin.

 “The freshman class will have more power than the leadership," said Khanna, himself just starting his second term. “The balance of power is shifting in the House; leadership doesn't matter nearly as much.”

But a savvy leader like Pelosi will matter, facing challenges beyond and within the chamber. Her talents and experience may work well with untested but eager novices.