Https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/21/the-myth-of-the-roots-of-the-opioid-crisis-217034/ is this article factually correct
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The Politico Magazine piece "The Myth of What’s Driving the Opioid Crisis" pushes back on a dominant narrative that prescription painkillers are the singular root cause of today’s overdose deaths, and that push has a basis in data — prescribing has declined in recent years even as overdose deaths kept climbing [1] [2] — but the article overreaches when it minimizes the documented role of prescription opioids and the industry, lawmakers and regulators that enabled their proliferation [3] [4]. The story is factually correct on several key trends but selective in highlighting evidence and underplays competing findings and accountability narratives documented by major investigations and public-health data [3] [1] [5].
1. What Politico got right: prescriptions down, deaths up
PolitiFact and FactCheck documented the important distinction Politico highlights: opioid prescribing declined in the late 2010s — one study found roughly a 10 percent reduction in retail pharmacy opioid prescriptions in 2017 — even as overdose deaths continued to rise, a sign the epidemic was evolving beyond simple overprescribing [2] [6] [1]. Public-health reporting also shows the rise in overdose mortality that began in the 2000s: opioid-related death rates nearly quadrupled between 1999 and 2015, and tens of thousands of Americans have died annually, with counts in the mid-2010s around 64,000–72,000 depending on year and source [5] [1] [7]. Those are factual building blocks Politico uses correctly.
2. Where the piece understates the role of prescription opioids and the industry
While the article argues prescription pills are not the "biggest threat" today, it risks underplaying evidence that legal prescriptions seeded much addiction and created markets later exploited by heroin and fentanyl; multiple public-health and investigative accounts trace the epidemic’s early escalation to increased medical prescribing and aggressive pharmaceutical marketing in the 1990s and 2000s [1] [4]. Investigations of congressional actions and lobbying have shown how policy moves limited the DEA’s ability to sanction distributors and pharmacies — an institutional failure central to assertions that industry and permissive regulation helped fuel pill availability [3]. Those findings complicate any simple corrective that shifts blame entirely away from prescription practices.
3. The evolving threat: illicit fentanyl and treatment gaps
The available literature and government reporting back up Politico’s core claim about an evolving crisis: illicit synthetic opioids, especially fentanyl, have become major drivers of recent overdose spikes even as prescribing moderates [1] [4]. Simultaneously, experts and public-health reviews stress persistent gaps in treatment capacity and access to medication-assisted therapies, meaning reductions in prescribing did not automatically translate into fewer deaths because demand, addiction and contaminated illicit markets remained [8] [4]. Politico’s emphasis on the changing composition of overdose risk is therefore grounded in documented trends.
4. Alternative interpretations and implicit agendas
There are clear alternative readings: public-health scholars and investigative reporters have tied the crisis’ origins and spread to corporate marketing, lax regulation, and physician overprescribing — narratives that prompt legal and policy accountability [3] [4]. Politico’s framing that downplays prescriptions aligns implicitly with narratives favoring law-and-order or treatment-first policy shifts rather than corporate culpability; readers should note that the selection and emphasis of sources shape conclusions and that other reputable sources reach more culpability-focused judgments [3] [8].
5. Bottom line and limits of available reporting
The Politico article is factually correct on data patterns — falling prescriptions and rising deaths — and on the increasing role of illicit opioids, but it is selective in assigning causation and insufficiently engages robust investigations showing industry and regulatory failures contributed to the crisis’ origins [2] [1] [3]. Reporting limitations mean one cannot definitively exonerate early prescription practices or pharmaceutical actors from a foundational role using the trends Politico highlights alone; both the historic role of prescriptions and the later dominance of illicit synthetics are supported by reputable sources [5] [4] [7].