UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA, USA.
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, USA.
J Law Med Ethics. 2024;52(1):118-132. doi: 10.1017/jme.2024.60. Epub 2024 May 31.
U.S. law imposes strict recording and reporting requirements on all entities that manufacture and distribute controlled substances. As a result, the prescription opioid crisis has unfolded in a data-saturated environment. This article asks why the systematic documentation of opioid transactions failed to prevent or mitigate the crisis. Drawing on a recently disclosed trove of 1.4 million internal records from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, a leading manufacturer of prescription opioids, we highlight a phenomenon we propose to call data diversion, whereby data ostensibly generated or collected for the purpose of regulating the distribution of controlled substances were repurposed by the industry for the opposite aim of increasing sales at all costs. Systematic data diversion, we argue, contributed substantially to the scale of drug diversion seen with opioids and should become a focus of policy intervention.
美国法律对所有制造和分发受控物质的实体都施加了严格的记录和报告要求。因此,阿片类药物危机在一个数据饱和的环境中展开。本文探讨了为什么对阿片类药物交易的系统记录未能预防或减轻这场危机。本文利用最近披露的 Mallinckrodt 制药公司(一家主要的处方类阿片类药物制造商)的 140 万份内部记录,突出了一种我们称之为“数据转移”的现象,即数据表面上是为了监管受控物质的分发而生成或收集的,但被行业重新用于增加销售的相反目的,不惜一切代价。我们认为,系统性的数据转移在很大程度上导致了阿片类药物药物转移的规模,并应成为政策干预的重点。