You seem to be unaware of the lengths Perdue went to obfuscate and mislead about where the line between responsible and dangerous use lies. Motive matters, and there is no reasonable doubt here.
Motive does matter, and Purdue is not "innocent", but Purdue is not the only party for which a healthy portion of the blame falls on.
If anyone's default position is to trust a private multibillion dollar company telling them something that sounds (or borders on sounding) too good to be true, I question whether they're even equipped to navigate their own lives responsibly, let alone make well-informed medical decisions for patients.
The thing about motive is that even if it depends on being able to persuade other people to act in a way that is against their interests, that does nothing to mitigate it.
If a person walks up to you and points a finger gun at your head and demands your wallet, I'd have very little sympathy for the "victim" of that robbery - they were more like a victim of their own gullibility.
If you're unable to connect the analogy to the original topic, I'd encourage you to seek the opinions of as many doctors as possible before making any medical decisions.
reply