Thread by @ChadDKollas

@ibdgirl76 The anti-opioid crowd also knows there are ethical problems with a control group in a long-term study in which opioids are beneficial (excluding controls a benefit is unethical).

They cite a “lack of data,” knowing it’s disingenuous - but knowing policymakers don’t know better!

@ibdgirl76 This is like saying there is no data from RCTs showing that parachutes are effective, then insisting on doing those studies to justify parachutes’ use.

It would be unethical to make controls jump from flying planes without parachutes, as they would certainly be harmed, right? 🤔

@ibdgirl76 But it turns out that there *IS* an RCT of parachutes that shows they are no more effective than empty back packs when jumping from a plane!! 😱

That is, when the plane is stationary and on the ground!!

bmj.com/content/363/bm…

@ibdgirl76 That👆🏼situation is analogous to when anti-opioid folks cite studies that show opioids are better than acetaminophen or NSAIDs…

…for patients with mild pain & no complicating illnesses, like liver or renal failure. Again, they’re disingenuous, but policymakers don’t know it!🤦🏻‍♂️

@ibdgirl76 These are the semantics games played by PROP and other anti-opioid groups that propel a #FalseNarrative that have created lousy, unbalanced opioid policies - policies that have harmed tens of thousands of patients in pain. Why do the policymakers allow it?

@ibdgirl76 First, because policymakers don’t understand scientific methodology.

Second, because they DON’T *WANT* TO UNDERSTAND!

They LIKE the #FalseNarrative. It propels lucrative state and federal lawsuits against opioid manufacturers & distributors. It’s a #LitigationNarrative!

@ibdgirl76 Welcome to my Opioid Policy TED talk! 👆🏼