Mind-Blowing Secrets Unveiled: Painkiller's Phenomenal Ending Deconstructed

WARNING! This article contains major SPOILERS for Painkiller!

Summary

The movie Painkiller illustrates the ascent and decline of Purdue Pharma, the company responsible for developing OxyContin. It sheds light on the hazardous consequences of the opioid crisis and the devastating toll it takes on individuals.

Purdue Pharma confronted significant legal issues, admitting guilt to several felony charges and incurring billions in fines and forfeitures. Consequently, the company eventually declared bankruptcy due to the onslaught of numerous lawsuits.

The Sackler family, owners of Purdue Pharma, have not been prosecuted for any criminal charges in connection with OxyContin or their company.

This article explores the opioid crisis, substance use disorders, overdose, relapse, and fatalities.

The Netflix series Painkiller portrays the rise and fall of Purdue Pharma, the company responsible for developing OxyContin. However, the conclusion of Painkiller left many unanswered questions. The limited series begins with an interview between investigators and federal agent Edie Flowers, who becomes the central focus as she endeavors to build a legal case against Purdue Pharma. Throughout her narrative, she intertwines various stories related to OxyContin, with particular emphasis on the Sacklers, a patient named Glen, and a pharmaceutical representative named Shannon.

In Painkiller, Purdue Pharma introduces a new narcotic drug called OxyContin, which they market through their team of pharmaceutical representatives. Shannon is one of these representatives, selling directly to doctors who prescribe medications. Following a work-related injury, Glen starts using OxyContin, believing it to be completely safe. Unfortunately, Shannon disregards the problems she recognizes with the drug and continues promoting OxyContin until she becomes one of Purdue Pharma's top sellers. Meanwhile, Glen develops a severe opioid use disorder that severely impairs his functioning. The ending of Painkiller vividly illustrates the grim realities of the ongoing opioid crisis.

Your browser does not support the video tag.

What Happened To Purdue Pharma & The Sackler Family After Painkiller's Lawsuit

Following the conclusion of the 2007 lawsuit as shown in the Painkiller ending, Purdue Pharma chose to persist with the sale of OxyContin. In an effort to enhance their reputation, they made minor modifications to their marketing strategies. Nevertheless, they found themselves embroiled in further legal difficulties. In 2020, Purdue Pharma pleaded guilty to three felony charges, namely attempting to defraud the United States, violating the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and violating the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Consequently, the company was sanctioned with a fine amounting to $3.544 billion as well as a forfeiture of $2 billion. The Department of Justice also confirmed that an additional $2.8 billion was paid by the company to address its liability under the False Claims Act. Subsequently, due to the onslaught of numerous lawsuits, the company sought bankruptcy protection.

In contrast, the Sackler family, in real life, has never been charged with any criminal offenses in relation to OxyContin or Purdue Pharma since the events depicted in Painkiller. According to Forbes, they were ranked as the 30th wealthiest family in the United States in 2020, with an estimated net worth of $10.8 billion. Currently, the Sacklers are seeking immunity from civil lawsuits as part of their bankruptcy agreement, effectively absolving them from any responsibility. The only form of retribution they have faced is the removal of the Sackler name from various buildings and museums, including the Louvre, Metropolitan Museum of Art, and Guggenheim (via Observer).

Glen's Death & Bigger Meaning Explained

Glen's death in Painkiller's ending is truly devastating. Despite his incredible achievement of staying off opioids for 30 days, he tragically finds himself exposed to OxyContin once again, leading to his untimely demise within a mere day. This heart-wrenching conclusion carries profound messages that need to be acknowledged. Primarily, attaining sobriety is an incredibly challenging endeavor for individuals battling substance use disorders, especially when they face triggers such as high-risk environments. Additionally, relapse is an unfortunate yet perilous aspect of grappling with substance use disorders. When a person experiences a relapse, they put themselves at risk of overdose or even death because their tolerance for the drug's potency has significantly decreased since the peak of their addiction (according to NIDA).

Is OxyContin Still Prescribed To Patients Today?

During the court scene, Edie expresses the collective upset and frustration over the plea deal. What makes it even worse, she points out, is that the production of OxyContin didn't have to be halted. Purdue Pharma continued to sell OxyContin on the market even after the events of Painkiller. In August 2010, Purdue Pharma started selling a reformulated version of OxyContin that was designed to discourage abuse. This new version is more difficult to crush, break, or dissolve – methods commonly used by individuals with opioid use disorder. A four-year longitudinal study published in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics showed that this change led to a decrease in overdoses and instances of abuse related to OxyContin.

In 2018, Purdue Pharma took a positive step by discontinuing direct sales to doctors. However, this action came far too late into the opioid epidemic, as reported by PBS. Over the years following the court case, the FDA has mandated various modifications to the black box warnings for opioids like OxyContin. These revised labels now provide clearer information about the risks of abuse, addiction, overdose, and death. Additionally, if Purdue Pharma's bankruptcy plan receives approval, the sales of OxyContin would transition to Knoa Pharma. This new company would operate under strict regulations, with a new leadership board, and without any association with the Sackler family.

Why Shannon Helps Edie In Painkiller

In Painkiller, Shannon believes she's aiding people but occasionally questions herself, especially when witnessing a car crash. However, she suppresses these doubts and adopts a utilitarian mindset, believing that the overall positive impact outweighs any harm caused. The pivotal moment occurs at the Purdue Pharma sales conference in Miami, where Shannon finally acknowledges the cult-like atmosphere surrounding her job. Her colleagues misuse the drug for recreational purposes rather than therapeutic ones. Pressured into joining in, Shannon ends up nearly drowning in a pool, a symbolic event in Painkiller. Overwhelmed by guilt, Shannon finds it impossible to maintain her moral integrity.

Having been rescued by someone, Shannon gains a newfound understanding of the importance of saving others. She begins by ceasing the sale of OxyContin for Purdue Pharma, facing the consequences of her harmful choices. Subsequently, she approaches Edie Flowers with a manila envelope containing all her conversations, documents, and data relating to OxyContin. Shannon agrees to provide any necessary information to support a legal case against Purdue Pharma. Despite her physical deterioration throughout the course of Painkiller, Shannon starts to regain her appearance and personality while assisting Edie in the final episode.

The Real-Life Sackler Family's Controversial History & Pharmaceutical Marketing Strategy Explained

The Sackler family and Purdue Pharma had a history of marketing and selling drugs before OxyContin, according to Painkiller. The New Yorker article reveals that the Sacklers initially worked as doctors with second jobs to support themselves. Arthur Sackler, in his advertising job, introduced a groundbreaking practice of marketing medications to doctors. Pharmaceutical companies paid for research results that Arthur then distributed to doctors' offices and medical journals. These advertisements not only distorted the truth but also included misleading information, as exemplified by one controversial advertisement in Painkiller that featured fictitious doctors alongside a medication endorsement.

Arthur Sackler expanded his business by advertising Valium, which is briefly mentioned in Painkiller. He promoted the drug as a solution for any psychiatric illness, even advocating its use in patients without psychiatric symptoms. This marketing approach was passed down to Arthur's children, who marketed OxyContin as a remedy for all types of pain, regardless of severity. However, both Valium and OxyContin are highly addictive, leading patients to develop substance use disorders.

How Accurate Painkiller Is To The Opioid Crisis & Real Lawsuit

: The Sackler family's acquisition of Purdue Pharma introduced a dangerous twist to Arthur Sackler's advertising method. With a newfound focus on pharmaceuticals, the family found themselves financially invested in both medications and promotional campaigns, which provided a disturbing incentive for engaging in unethical and illegal advertising practices. As time went on, Purdue expanded its product range to include opioids such as MSContin and OxyContin, all the while utilizing the same advertising strategies pioneered by Arthur. Sadly, these actions played a significant role in fueling the opioid crisis that is hauntingly depicted throughout Painkiller.

While Painkiller offers some accurate facts about the opioid crisis, its portrayal is limited and lacks essential context. The show acknowledges that opioid use disorder devastates families, but it solely focuses on Glen as an example, thus excluding the range of experiences that exist. Moreover, the characters affected by OxyContin lack diversity, failing to reflect real-life situations. Additionally, Painkiller overlooks the crucial aspect of showcasing emergency rooms and medical professionals dealing with addiction treatment and overdoses, denying an opportunity to explore the broader societal impacts. Furthermore, although withdrawal is briefly mentioned, it fails to provide a comprehensive representation of the various symptoms associated with opioid withdrawal. In essence, while this show serves as a catalyst for discussion, it should not be the sole source of information for viewers seeking understanding about the opioid crisis.

Despite the aforementioned issues, Painkiller remains fairly true to the events of the 2007 lawsuit against Purdue Pharma. According to a CNBC article from the year of the trial, the company and three high-level executives admitted guilt in relation to misleading marketing about the addictive nature of OxyContin. They were subsequently fined a total of $634.5 million as a result of the case. The Sacklers, on the other hand, escaped any legal repercussions. The only detail that Painkiller fails to mention is that, just two days prior to the trial, Purdue Pharma also agreed to pay $19.5 million to 26 states and Washington D.C. for encouraging doctors to overprescribe OxyContin.

The True Meaning Of Painkiller's Ending

The conclusion of Painkiller delivers a powerful message that the battle against injustice is an ongoing one. Despite facing setbacks such as Purdue Pharma's plea deal, individuals like the investigators Edie converses with demonstrate unwavering persistence. Painkiller refuses to gloss over reality by presenting an illusion of effortless change. As exemplified by Glen's demise, the series highlights the arduous nature of transformation. The portrayal of the opioid crisis underscores the absence of a quick solution, mirroring the complexities of society. Nevertheless, characters such as Shannon and Edie embody a beacon of hope, symbolizing the possibility of a brighter future.

The Sacklers have not been convicted of any crimes related to OxyContin and deny any wrongdoing.