Health
Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Challenge Over Opioid Bankruptcy Deal
The Supreme Court agreed on Thursday to consider the government’s challenge of a bankruptcy settlement involving Purdue Pharma, putting on pause a deal that would have shielded members of the wealthy Sackler family from civil opioid lawsuits in exchange for payments of up to $6 billion to thousands of plaintiffs.
In doing so, the court sided with the Justice Department, which had requested the court put the settlement plan on hold while it considered reviewing the agreement. The government has argued that the family behind Purdue Pharma, maker of the prescription painkiller OxyContin, should not be able to take advantage of legal protections meant for debtors in “financial distress.”
The court’s order, which was unsigned, gave no reasons and included no public dissents, adds to the uncertainty around the plan to compensate states, local governments, tribes and individuals harmed by the opioid crisis while offering protection for the Sackler family. The order specified that the justices would hear arguments in the case in December.
The court’s decision to take up the challenge to the bankruptcy agreement is the latest twist in the yearslong legal battle over compensation for victims of the prescription drug crisis.
In May, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit approved the settlement plan as part of a court review of bankruptcy restructuring for Purdue Pharma. The company had filed for bankruptcy protections in September 2019. At the time, both the company and members of the Sackler family were facing lawsuits connected with the opioid crisis.
Although it is routine for companies who seek bankruptcy protection to be shielded from legal claims, the unusual part of this agreement was that it extended that liability protection to the company’s owners. Sackler family members have said they would not sign onto a settlement without an agreement protecting them from lawsuits.
The U.S. Trustee Program, an office in the Justice Department that oversees the administration of bankruptcy cases, has long argued that bankruptcy judges do not have the power to permanently block lawsuits against company owners if those owners haven’t sought personal bankruptcy protection.
The government has argued that federal appeals courts are split on this issue and that the settlement agreement may set a troubling precedent.
“Allowing the court of appeals’ decision to stand would leave in place a road map for wealthy corporations and individuals to misuse the bankruptcy system to avoid mass tort liability,” the solicitor general, Elizabeth B. Prelogar, wrote in a brief for the government.
The appeals court, Ms. Prelogar wrote, had “pinned itself firmly on one side of a widely acknowledged circuit split about an important and recurring question of bankruptcy law.”
Ms. Prelogar called the agreement “a release from liability that is of exceptional and unprecedented breadth.” She argued that the deal “applies to an untold number of claimants who did not specifically consent to the release’s terms,” a deal that “constitutes an abuse of the bankruptcy system, and raises serious constitutional questions.”
In a statement released after Thursday’s decision, a spokeswoman for Purdue Pharma said the company was “confident in the legality” of the bankruptcy plan.
Members of the Sackler family are no longer on the board of the pharmaceutical company. When the bankruptcy is finalized, they will no longer be owners of the company, which would be renamed Knoa Pharma and owned by its creditors. However, the family still remains wealthy. Some estimates put their fortune at $11 billion, much of it in offshore holdings.
Victims’ groups have expressed frustration at the government’s position, raising concerns that it would further delay payments to those harmed.
“Regardless of how one feels about the role of the Sackler family in the creation and escalation of the opioid crisis, the fact remains that the billions of dollars in abatement and victim compensation funds hinge on confirmation and consummation of the existing plan,” a brief filed on behalf of a victims’ group said. “These funds, which the Sackler family members are providing in exchange for releases, are critically needed now.”
Jan Hoffman contributed reporting.
Health
Your July 2024 Horoscope: Zodiac Sign Monthly Forecast | Woman's World
Sign Up
Create a free account to access exclusive content, play games, solve puzzles, test your pop-culture knowledge and receive special offers.
Already have an account? Login
Forgot your password?
Get back to the Sign In
Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.
Use escape to exit the menu.
Health
Childhood medical myths debunked as experts weigh in on 5 common warnings
Mothers might know best, but it’s not always easy to separate fact from fiction when it comes to health advice.
A new report from University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Health has broken down several common wellness myths that children often hear while growing up.
Fox News Digital spoke with experts who revealed the truth behind common medical misconceptions.
PSYCHOLOGISTS REVEAL 7 WAYS PARENTS CAN DRIVE HAPPINESS BY HELPING KIDS FIND THEIR PURPOSE
Here are five.
Myth 1. Ginger ale relieves stomach aches
While actual ginger can help ease a stomach ache, most commercial ginger ales don’t actually contain the real thing, Michelle Jaelin, a registered dietitian practicing in Ontario, Canada, told Fox News Digital.
This childhood myth persists as parents give ginger ale to children because it’s sweet and bubbly, she said.
“It makes parents feel better that they are doing something for their child when they aren’t feeling well, and the myth persisted as a drink that helps a stomach ache,” Jaelin said.
The carbonated beverages could actually make the stomach pain even worse by increasing gas in the digestive tract, according to Healthline’s website.
Drinks with real ginger also tend to contain excess added sugar, experts said – essentially the equivalent of soda that may worsen stomach pain.
Myth 2. Gum stays in your stomach for seven years
“Swallowed gum does not stay in your stomach for [seven] years, as the myths suggest,” Su-Nui Escobar, a registered dietitian based in Miami, Florida, told Fox News Digital.
“While swallowing gum is not recommended, if you do so accidentally, you will likely pass it like any other indigestible food.”
ASK A DOCTOR: ‘IS IT DANGEROUS TO SWALLOW GUM?’
The gum will pass through the stomach within two hours and be excreted in the stool after approximately two to five days, just like other foods, according to the recent UCSF report.
Although chewing gum can stick to many surfaces — including walls or desks — it travels mostly intact through the gastrointestinal tract without sticking to the intestinal walls, the report notes.
But experts still caution against children swallowing gum, because substantial amounts might cause an intestinal blockage, Escobar warned.
This is a particular concern among children who have underlying constipation, according to Mayo Clinic’s website.
“If you suspect a blockage, seek immediate medical attention,” Escobar advised.
Myth 3. You shouldn’t swim for 30 minutes after eating
As summer kicks into high gear, there is good news for any swimmer itching to get in the water after lunch. Yes, it is usually OK to swim right after you eat.
The myth that you shouldn’t swim immediately after eating stems from a theoretical concern that blood flow will be diverted away from the arms and legs to help digest food, potentially leading to an increased risk of drowning.
“Based on current research, eating before swimming is not affiliated with a risk of drowning, and can be dismissed as a myth.”
But a comprehensive American Red Cross scientific review on the effects of eating before swimming showed no effect on performance in the water after a meal.
“A recent literature review did not provide any information related to an increased risk of drowning due to consuming food before swimming,” Jodi Jensen, PhD, member of the American Red Cross Scientific Advisory Council in Virginia, told Fox News Digital.
AS DROWNING DEATHS INCREASE, EXPERTS OFFER WATER SAFETY TIPS
“There is no supporting evidence from a major medical or safety organization that recommends refraining from eating before engaging in aquatic activities such as swimming,” added Jensen, who is also an assistant professor and aquatics director at Hampton University in Hampton, Virginia.
“Based on current research, eating before swimming is not affiliated with a risk of drowning, and can be dismissed as a myth.”
Although study participants experienced “minimal” side effects at different time intervals after eating, some outside experts do recommend waiting a bit after a meal if you plan to swim laps or compete to avoid any stomach cramping or digestive issues.
Myth 4. Chicken soup cures a cold
Chicken soup has been viewed as a popular cold remedy since at least the 12th century, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
ASK A DOCTOR: ‘DOES CHICKEN SOUP REALLY HELP CURE A COLD?’
“Chicken soup is warm and comforting when you’re sick, but it’s not a cure,” Jaelin told Fox News Digital.
“Chicken soup is warm and comforting when you’re sick, but it’s not a cure.”
“Drinking any hot broth when your sinuses are stuffed can help to clear them out.”
The steam from the chicken broth may relieve a sore throat and congested sinuses, the NIH noted.
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews/health.
When battling a cold, get plenty of clear fluids to help regulate body temperature and promote improved immune system function, said Jaelin.
“Chicken soup counts toward overall fluid intake,” she added.
It also helps prevent dehydration and clear out mucus, the NIH noted.
Myth 5. You will ruin your eyes if you sit too close to the TV
Sitting too close to the TV will not damage your eyes, though it may cause eye strain, according to the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
NEBRASKA BABY BORN WITH CATARACTS HAS 3 EYE SURGERIES TO SAVE HER SIGHT: ‘I JUST KEPT PRAYING’
To prevent eye strain while watching television, experts recommend keeping the room well-lit and taking occasional breaks from the screen.
“Children can focus at very close distances better than adults, and may not develop the same eye strain symptoms,” Nishika Reddy, M.D., assistant professor of ophthalmology at Moran Eye Center’s Midvalley Health Center at University of Utah in Murray, Utah, told Fox News Digital.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
It may be a red flag, though, if children are watching television too closely, experts warned.
The behavior may indicate an underlying vision issue that should be addressed, the UCSF report noted.
“See an eye care provider to perform an eye exam for your child,” Reddy recommended.
A more concerning issue is the indirect effect of too much screen time, according to the report.
Although experts say there is no one-size-fits-all guideline when it comes to children and screen time, the American Academy of Pediatrics says high-quality digital media can be introduced to children between 18 and 24 months of age (only when supervised by parents or caregivers).
The academy also recommends limiting screen time to one hour a day for children ages 2 to 5.
Fox News Digital reached out to UCSF for additional comment about its new study.
Health
The Anti-Inflammatory and Mediterranean Diets: Two Immune System-Boosting Diets That Don't Skimp on Flavor | Woman's World
Sign Up
Create a free account to access exclusive content, play games, solve puzzles, test your pop-culture knowledge and receive special offers.
Already have an account? Login
Forgot your password?
Get back to the Sign In
Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.
Use escape to exit the menu.
-
News1 week ago
NYC pastor is sentenced to 9 years for fraud, including taking a single mom's $90,000
-
News1 week ago
Read the Ruling by the Virginia Court of Appeals
-
News7 days ago
Tracking a Single Day at the National Domestic Violence Hotline
-
Politics1 week ago
Trump classified docs judge to weigh alleged 'unlawful' appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith
-
News1 week ago
Supreme Court upholds law barring domestic abusers from owning guns in major Second Amendment ruling | CNN Politics
-
Crypto1 week ago
Factors Driving the Evolution of Cryptocurrency Markets
-
Politics7 days ago
Supreme Court upholds federal gun ban for those under domestic violence restraining orders
-
News1 week ago
Opinion: Extreme heat kills. What the US can do to protect the most vulnerable | CNN