Purdue Pharma is offering up to $12 billion to settle lawsuits over its role in the opioid epidemic; the US Preventive Services Task Force is aiming to expand its hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening recommendations to include all adults aged 18 to 79 years; the majority of Democratic voters would be more likely to support a candidate that backs a single-payer health system like Medicare for All.
In an effort to settle over 2000 lawsuits against the company for its role in the opioid epidemic, Purdue Pharma is offering $10 billion to $12 billion. The lawsuits, brought by states, cities, and counties, allege that Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family are responsible for fueling and maintaining the opioid crisis. According to NBC News, the offer was part of confidential conversations and discussed by the opioid maker’s lawyers at a meeting last week. At least 10 state attorneys general and Purdue Pharma’s attorneys met in Cleveland where David Sackler represented the family.
Amid a rise of hepatitis C virus in younger people, the US Preventive Services Task Force is aiming to expand its recommendations for screening for the viral infection. According to The Wall Street Journal, the panel is aiming to recommend that all adults aged 18 to 79 years get screened for hepatitis C, which would expand on the 2013 recommendation to screen those born between 1945 and 1965. CDC data has shown that the baby boomer generation accounts for approximately 75% of those living with the infection. However, in the last decade, acute incidence among younger people has expanded rapidly, which experts attribute to the opioid epidemic.
A Politico/Morning Consult poll has found that 65% of Democratic primary voters would be more willing to support a candidate who is in favor of a single-payer healthcare system, such as Medicare for All. Meanwhile, 13% said they would be less likely to support a candidate based on their support of it. The survey included 1987 registered voters, including 768 Democratic voters. Nearly half (45%) of voters said that a candidate’s support of Medicare for All would make them more likely to vote for them over a candidate that supports building on the Affordable Care Act.