-
An expert testified in an ongoing Oklahoma lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson suggested that the company may have had an even greater role in the opioid crisis than Purdue Pharma, CNN reported Tuesday.
-
"Until I had an opportunity to review discovery documents…I really was not aware of how bad Johnson & Johnson was," commented Andrew Kolodny, co-director of the Opioid Policy Research Collaborative at Brandeis University.
-
In the lawsuit, Oklahoma argued that Johnson & Johnson's Tasmanian Alkaloids and Noramco subsidiaries "created, grew, imported and supplied to [Johnson & Johnson] and its other co-conspirators, including Purdue, the narcotic raw materials necessary to manufacture the opioid pain medications thrust upon the unsuspecting public since the 1990s."
-
Kolodny contended that said Johnson & Johnson differentiated itself from other companies because of its key role in all three types of opioids, namely natural, semi-synthetic and synthetic opioids.
-
"The testimony of [Kolodny] was filled with rampant speculation and conclusions not derived from facts," countered defence attorney John Sparks, continuing "the evidence remains that Johnson & Johnson and its former subsidiaries appropriately and responsibly met all laws and regulations on the manufacturing, sale and distribution of active pharmaceutical ingredients and pharmaceutical products."
-
Oklahoma previously entered into settlements of $270 million with Purdue Pharma and $85 million with Teva over similar claims.
(All Rights Reserved)