Weekly Mass Torts Bulletin 2024-December-31
Study Links Roundup Chemical to Long-Term Brain Damage
A recent study suggests that exposure to the widely used herbicide Roundup, which contains the active ingredient glyphosate, may be linked to the development of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s.
What does the study indicate?
Conducted by researchers from Arizona State University and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in California, the findings were published on December 4 in the Journal of Neuroinflammation. The study indicates that glyphosate exposure increases brain inflammation in mice, potentially raising the risk of similar conditions in humans.
Roundup's History
Roundup has been a staple in agriculture and residential weed control for decades, marketed as safe for humans. However, growing research connects glyphosate to serious health risks, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers. Over the years, Bayer and its Monsanto subsidiary have faced more than 120,000 lawsuits claiming glyphosate exposure caused cancer. These legal battles have resulted in over $10 billion in settlements. In response to public outcry, Bayer announced in 2021 that it would remove glyphosate from consumer versions of Roundup, though the chemical remains in formulations used for agricultural purposes.
Impact of exposure on mice
The study explored the impact of glyphosate exposure on mice, revealing that the chemical triggered neuroinflammation and worsened symptoms in mice predisposed to Alzheimer’s disease. Even short-term exposure resulted in long-lasting effects, including heightened brain inflammation, anxiety-like behaviors, and increased early mortality. Notably, these outcomes persisted in mice given six months to recover post-exposure. Researchers attribute these effects to aminomethylphosphonic acid, a metabolite of glyphosate that accumulates in brain tissue.
What did the researchers say?
The study underscores the potential danger of glyphosate in exacerbating neurological conditions. “Our results are the first to demonstrate that, despite an extended recovery period, exposure to glyphosate elicits long-lasting pathological consequences,” the researchers concluded. They emphasize the need for further studies to assess the herbicide's impact on human brain health and its possible role in neurodegenerative diseases.
Raising concerns around Roundup
As glyphosate use continues to rise globally, the findings raise concerns about its broader implications for public health, highlighting the need for more stringent evaluations of its safety and long-term effects.
McKinsey to Pay $650M for Aiding Purdue Pharma’s Opioid Sales
McKinsey & Company has agreed to a $650 million settlement with the U.S. Justice Department to resolve a federal investigation into its role in helping Purdue Pharma boost sales of the addictive painkiller OxyContin, according to court documents filed in Virginia.
Mckinsey's role as part of the agreement
As part of the agreement, McKinsey will avoid criminal prosecution by paying the settlement amount and adhering to specific conditions over the next five years, including halting any work related to the sale, marketing, or promotion of controlled substances.
McKinsey's senior partner's involvement
A former senior partner at McKinsey has also agreed to plead guilty to obstruction of justice for deleting documents from his laptop after learning of investigations into Purdue Pharma, a long-time McKinsey client. The partner’s lawyer declined to comment.
What did the McKinsey's say?
In a statement, McKinsey expressed regret for its involvement with Purdue. “We deeply regret our work with Purdue Pharma. We should have recognized the harm opioids were causing in society and should never have engaged in sales and marketing efforts for Purdue,” the firm stated. “This public health crisis and our role in it will remain a source of profound regret for our firm.”
Prescription opioids as main drivers of the crisis
This settlement represents another step by federal prosecutors to hold companies accountable for their roles in the opioid epidemic, which has contributed to over 80,000 overdose deaths annually in recent years. While illicit fentanyl has been the primary cause of deaths in recent years, prescription opioids like OxyContin were the main drivers earlier in the crisis. Over the past eight years, pharmaceutical companies, distributors, and pharmacies have reached settlements totaling approximately $50 billion with governments. Most of these funds are earmarked for combating the opioid crisis.
Mckinsey continues to work with Purdue despite warnings
Between 2004 and 2019, Purdue Pharma paid McKinsey over $93 million for consulting services, including strategies to maximize OxyContin revenues. Prosecutors allege McKinsey was aware of the risks and dangers of OxyContin and knew Purdue executives had previously pleaded guilty to crimes related to its promotion. Nevertheless, McKinsey continued to work with Purdue, providing strategies that included targeting prescribers likely to increase OxyContin prescriptions.
According to court filings, McKinsey’s work resulted in prescriptions that were unsafe, medically unnecessary, or diverted for illegitimate uses. U.S. Attorney Christopher Kavanaugh said in a news conference, “This was not just marketing. It was a deliberate strategy that was executed and succeeded.”
Crisis & 2013 proceedings
In 2013, after Purdue experienced declining sales, McKinsey consultants collaborated with Purdue representatives on visits to prescribers and pharmacies to collect information. In one instance, a McKinsey consultant noted a pharmacist who was visibly shaken and armed, commenting, “Abuse is definitely a huge issue.” Despite this, McKinsey continued to explore methods to increase OxyContin sales.
Court filings revealed that in 2014, McKinsey identified small clinics prescribing opioids at rates exceeding those of entire hospital systems and recommended targeting these clinics to drive sales. The firm also attempted to influence federal regulations, advising Purdue on how to minimize oversight of high-dose OxyContin and make prescriber training voluntary instead of mandatory.
Mckinsey's $765 million settlement
Since 2021, McKinsey has agreed to pay $765 million in settlements to state and local governments for its role in advising companies on opioid sales strategies. Additionally, the firm paid $78 million last year to healthcare funds and insurance companies. This settlement marks the first instance of a management consulting firm being held legally accountable for advising a client engaged in criminal activity. “If a consulting firm conspires with a client to engage in criminal conduct, being an outside consultant does not provide immunity,” stated the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts.
Conclusion
The opioid crisis, which many attribute to the introduction of OxyContin in 1996, has had devastating consequences. In 2007, Purdue executives pleaded guilty to misbranding charges, and the company agreed to pay a fine. In 2020, Purdue pleaded guilty to additional criminal charges and agreed to $8.3 billion in penalties, most of which will be waived if the company finalizes a bankruptcy settlement currently under review.
McKinsey’s role in shaping Purdue’s sales and marketing strategies highlights the broader responsibilities of consulting firms in ensuring ethical practices and prioritizing public health over profit-driven motives.
Opioid Overdose Deaths Reach Lowest Level Since 2020
A recent Ohio Supreme Court decision has cast doubt on a $650 million judgment awarded to two counties—Lake and Trumbull—against CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart for their alleged roles in fueling the opioid epidemic.
What does the ruling state?
The court ruled that under the Ohio Product Liability Act (OPLA), lawsuits cannot claim that the sale of opioids by pharmaceutical chains constitutes a “public nuisance.” The ruling hinges on a 2007 amendment to the OPLA, which prohibits public nuisance claims arising from product sales when seeking compensation. Writing for the majority, one justice clarified that the law applies to claims linked to product design, manufacturing, marketing, and advertising but not the dispensing of products. The justice emphasized that addressing the opioid crisis is beyond the court’s authority, stating, “The devastation experienced by private citizens... has far-reaching consequences, but creating a solution to this crisis out of whole cloth is beyond this court’s authority.”
Counties awarded
The counties’ claims were originally upheld in 2022 when U.S. District Judge awarded Lake County $306 million and Trumbull County $344 million, payable over 15 years. The federal court ruling followed a jury’s finding in 2021 that the pharmacies had created a public nuisance by negligently dispensing opioids. The funds were intended to address the opioid epidemic in the communities.
Pharmacies appealed the judgment
However, the pharmacies appealed the judgment, arguing that the public nuisance claim fell outside the scope of the OPLA, prompting the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to request clarification from the Ohio Supreme Court. While the counties argued they were seeking equitable relief, not compensatory damages, the court ultimately sided with the pharmacies.
What did the attorney representing the counties say?
Representatives for the counties expressed dismay over the ruling. An attorney for the counties stated, “This ruling will have a devastating impact on communities and their ability to police corporate misconduct.” He noted that public nuisance claims have been instrumental in securing nearly $60 billion in opioid settlements nationwide, including close to $1 billion in Ohio alone.
Pharmacies welcomed the decision
The pharmacies welcomed the decision. CVS and Walgreens issued a joint statement expressing their satisfaction, while Walmart defended its pharmacists and criticized attempts to broaden public nuisance laws to regulate lawful and already-regulated products. Walmart stated, “The Ohio Supreme Court is the latest court to correctly reject plaintiff-lawyers’ efforts to radically expand public nuisance law.”
How did the legal team for counties react?
Despite the setback, the counties’ legal team vowed to continue their fight through other avenues. They maintain that pharmaceutical companies played a significant role in the opioid epidemic, which has devastated communities across Ohio and beyond. The court’s decision underscores the challenges in using public nuisance claims to hold companies accountable for the distribution of regulated products.