How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
Lake County News,California
  • Home
    • Registration Form
  • News
    • Education
    • Veterans
    • Community
      • Obituaries
      • Letters
      • Commentary
    • Police Logs
    • Business
    • Recreation
    • Health
    • Religion
    • Legals
    • Arts & Life
    • Regional
  • Calendar
  • Contact us
    • FAQs
    • Phones, E-Mail
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise Here
  • Login
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page

News

$7.4 billion settlement reached with Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family for fueling the opioid crisis

Details
Written by: LAKE COUNTY NEWS REPORTS
Published: 24 January 2025
California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Thursday announced that the bipartisan States Negotiating Committee and other parties have reached a $7.4 billion settlement in principle with members of the Sackler family and their former company Purdue Pharma L.P. for what Bonta’s office said was “their instrumental role in creating and exacerbating the opioid crisis.”

“Purdue, under the Sacklers’ leadership, invented, manufactured, and aggressively marketed opioid products for decades, fueling waves of addiction and overdose deaths across the country,” Bonta’s office said in the Thursday statement.

The settlement ends the Sacklers’ control of Purdue and ability to sell opioids in the United States, and will deliver funding directly to communities across the country over the next 15 years to support opioid addiction treatment, prevention, and recovery programs.

“The opioid epidemic has ravaged communities in California and across the country, forever changing society as we know it. My office has been committed to fighting this crisis, and today, we are holding accountable two of the worst perpetrators: Purdue Pharma and the Sackler Family,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I want to thank my team at the California Department of Justice and my fellow attorneys general for making this historic settlement possible. Those who prioritize profits over people will continue to face serious consequences.”

If approved by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Thursday’s proposed settlement, which will be part of a comprehensive bankruptcy plan of reorganization, will deliver funds to the participating states, local governments, affected individuals, and other parties.

A significant amount of the settlement funds will be distributed in the first three years, with the Sacklers paying $1.5 billion and Purdue paying nearly $900 million soon after a bankruptcy plan is confirmed, followed by $500 million after one year, an additional $500 million after two years, and $400 million after three years.

California is expected to receive hundreds of millions of dollars for opioid abatement.

The settlement also reflects the end of the Sacklers’ control of Purdue and bars them from selling opioids in the United States. A board of trustees selected by participating states in consultation with the other creditors will determine the future of the company. Purdue will continue to be overseen by a monitor and will be prevented from lobbying or marketing opioids under the settlement.

If approved, the proposed bankruptcy plan and related settlement will make public more than 30 million documents related to Purdue and the Sacklers’ opioid business.

The document repository will now also contain documents relating to compliance with the 2007 State Attorneys General Consent Judgments with Purdue, and after six years will make public certain documents that were subject to attorney-client and work-product protection.

In 2021, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York approved a bankruptcy plan covering Purdue and the Sackler family that would have required the Sacklers to pay billions of dollars in exchange for non-consensual releases from liability.

In June 2024, the United States Supreme Court invalidated the previous bankruptcy plan, holding that the Bankruptcy Code did not authorize such nonconsensual shields from liability. The current settlement in principle is built on consensual releases in exchange for the payments the Sacklers will be making.

Members of the Sackler family included in the settlement in principle include the eight heirs of Purdue founders Raymond and Mortimer Sackler who served on the Board of Purdue: Richard, Kathe, Mortimer Jr., Ilene, David, and Theresa Sackler; and the estates of Jonathan and Beverly Sackler. In addition, their associated trusts, advisers and most of their children and heirs are also included.

Joining Attorney General Bonta in securing the settlement in principle are the members of the States Negotiating Committee: the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia.

FDA bans Red 3 dye from food and drugs – a scientist explains the artificial color’s health risks and long history

Details
Written by: Lorne J. Hofseth, University of South Carolina
Published: 24 January 2025

 

Look out for Red 3, FD&C Red No. 3, erythrosine or E127 in the ingredients list of your favorite processed foods. Anhelina Chumak/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Red 3 – also called FD&C Red No. 3, erythrosine or E127 – has been widely used in food, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals since its FDA approval in 1969. You’ve likely encountered Red 3 before. It’s a common additive to many candies, beverages, baked goods, cereals, maraschino cherries and gelatin desserts, as well as certain medications, syrups and cosmetics.

However, mounting scientific evidence suggests that consuming Red 3 poses significant health risks. These risks prompted California to ban its use in food in 2023 and the Food and Drug Administration to ban its use in both food and pharmaceuticals nationwide on Jan. 15, 2025.

As a researcher studying inflammation and cancer, I investigate how synthetic food dyes affect human health. Stricter regulations reflect growing concerns over the negative physiological effects of Red 3 and other synthetic dyes on your body, including causing cancer.

Health risks of Red 3

Over the past 35 years, an increasing amount of scientific evidence has identified the negative health effects of Red 3. While researchers haven’t yet established a direct link between Red 3 and cancer in people, substantial evidence from animal studies points to its carcinogenic potential.

First, Red 3 disrupts thyroid hormone regulation through several mechanisms. It inhibits the thyroid gland’s ability to absorb iodine, a key component for synthesizing thyroid hormones, and blocks an enzyme essential for converting one thyroid hormone to another, contributing to thyroid dysfunction. Along with other impairments in thyroid hormone function, Red 3 increases the risk of thyroid-related disorders.

Second, Red 3 may promote thyroid tumor formation. Several studies exposing rats and pigs to Red 3 observed enlarged tumorous thyroid glands and abnormalities in hormone regulation.

Third, Red 3 can have toxic effects on the brain in multiple ways. Rat studies have found that this synthetic dye increases oxidative stress, which damages tissues, and reduces the antioxidants that control oxidative stress, impairing communication between neurons. Studies in rodents also found that Red 3 triggers neuroinflammation that leads to neuronal damage and dysfunction. Additionally, Red 3 may interact with the amyloid-beta peptides linked to neurodegenerative conditions like Alzheimer’s disease and worsen those conditions.

Regulatory momentum

Red 3 first faced scrutiny in the 1980s when several animal studies linked it to thyroid tumors in male rats. This led to its 1990 ban in cosmetics in the U.S., although its use in food persisted under industry pressure. While the European Union restricted the use of Red 3 to only certain types of processed cherries in 1994, the U.S. has lagged behind.

California’s 2023 ban of Red 3 in foods, effective in 2027, reignited debate on Red 3 and its link to cancer and spurred 24 organizations to advocate for federal action.

Several countries have banned the use of Red 3 in food. Until January 2025, the U.S. had only banned it in cosmetics and topical drugs.

This debate culminated in the FDA’s nationwide ban in January 2025. While the FDA cites no direct evidence of Red 3’s carcinogenic effect in people, it acknowledges that animal studies provide sufficient basis for regulatory action. The FDA’s decision aligns with the 1958 Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, mandating a ban on additives shown to cause cancer in humans or animals.

Notably, it took over 35 years from the initial findings of thyroid cancer in rodents to the eventual ban in 2025.

A path forward

The progression from Red 3’s approval to its prohibition highlights the conflict between industrial interests and public health. Continued vigilance over Red 3 could help the nation prioritize consumer safety.

Under the FDA’s mandate, manufacturers must reformulate food products and ingested drugs to leave out Red 3 by January 2027 and January 2028, respectively. While some countries still permit use of Red 3, U.S. imports must meet domestic safety standards. Harmonizing global standards on regulating and evaluating synthetic dyes is essential to protect consumer health.

Close-up of colorful cereal loops
Stronger, more standardized regulation of synthetic food dyes would help protect consumer health. choness/iStock via Getty Images

Several companies selling ultra-processed foods have begun the shift away from synthetic dyes. In 2016, Mars announced plans to remove all artificial colors from its human food products over a five-year period. In 2024, General Mills announced that it would eliminate artificial colors and flavors from its products.

Consumers can protect themselves from Red 3 exposure by reading ingredient labels for “FD&C Red No. 3” or “E127” and choosing products that use natural dyes. Preparing homemade foods with natural color alternatives like beet juice or turmeric is another option. Supporting dye-free brands and staying informed about regulatory changes can further reduce your exposure while promoting safer food practices.

Ongoing research and policy reforms focused on public safety could help ensure that food additives like Red 3 no longer put consumer health at risk.The Conversation

Lorne J. Hofseth, Professor and Associate Dean for Research, College of Pharmacy, University of South Carolina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Kelseyville’s name change may come back to the Board of Supervisors

Details
Written by: LINGZI CHEN
Published: 23 January 2025
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — In December, the Board of Supervisors submitted a recommendation to the United States Board of Geographical Names to support renaming Kelseyville to Konocti following a board vote. Now, with newly sworn-in supervisors, the board faces calls to revisit the contentious decision.

Last Tuesday, former Supervisor Rob Brown urged the Board of Supervisors to revisit the matter during public comment at the boarding meeting.

Brown, who served five terms as District 5 supervisor until 2021, argued that the new supervisors, Helen Owen and Brad Rasmussen, should have the opportunity to “weigh in.”

“I think it’s important that the current board, including the two new board members, be involved in this discussion,” Brown said.

Brown also criticized the timing of the board’s December decision, which included votes made by two outgoing supervisors who were to leave office in January, and questioned the legitimacy of outgoing District 4 Supervisor Michael Green’s involvement in “an issue this magnitude.”

“They are not going to be here to deal with the ramifications and the fallout of this decision, regardless of how it comes down,” Brown continued.

“In fact, one of the board members was not even a legitimately elected board member, nor did he care enough to even run for office as a county supervisor,” said Brown, referring to Green, who was not elected but who Gov. Gavin Newsom appointed in 2022. He did not run for office in 2024.

“So I respectfully ask that it be placed on the earliest available agenda for reconsideration,” Brown added.

In addition to making public comment, Brown also contacted Supervisor Eddie Crandell, who serves as the board chair for 2025, prior to and right after the meeting regarding the matter. Last Wednesday, Crandell responded.

“Thank you again for touching base with me before the meeting. I will definitely reach out to you with the date and time this will be agendized,” Crandell said in the email to Brown, suggesting a positive response to Brown’s request.

As of Wednesday, Supervisor Crandell has not replied to Lake County News’ inquiries regarding if the board will bring back the matter and on what grounds it can be done so as the recommendation for the name change has been submitted.

For Brown, the December vote by the former board was not supposed to take place in the first place as two supervisors were stepping down.

“They should have held it off anyway,” Brown told Lake County News in a phone call. “The new board is the one who has to deal with the fallout on any name changes or not name change — either way.”

Although Brown has not heard back from Supervisor Crandell on when it will be agendized, he believes it’s coming soon.

“I’m assuming it’s going to be the first Tuesday of February,” said Brown. “There’s no reason for it to drag on.”

The pathway to the board’s name change recommendation

In October 2023, “Citizens for Healing” proposed renaming Kelseyville, citing its association with Andrew Kelsey, who, with Charles Stone, brutalized, raped and murdered Pomo tribal members. Their actions led to their deaths in 1849, sparking retaliatory violence, including the 1850 Bloody Island massacre.

In February, the U.S. Board of Geographic Names, or the BGN, sought input from the Board of Supervisors on the matter.

The Board of Supervisors held a special meeting in July and placed the countywide advisory, non-binding Measure U on the ballot. It asked voters if the Board of Supervisors should recommend the name change of Kelseyville to Konocti, as Citizens for Healing proposed.

A majority of voters rejected the measure in November, with 70.58% voting “no” and 29.42% voting “yes.”

On Dec. 10, the Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to recommend the name change to the BGN despite voter opposition.

Supervisor Eddie Crandell, and outgoing supervisor Moke Simon and Michael Green voted in favor of the option to recommend the name change.

Crandell cited unanimous support from the National Congress of American Indians, which consists of 574 federally-recognized tribes in the nation. Simon said he got what he wanted — to have people’s vote “on the record.” Green said the name is derogatory and offensive and has to “go bye-bye.”

Supervisor Jessica Pyska and Bruno Sabatier voted against it. Pyska, in whose district Kelseyville is located, suggested giving no formal recommendation while Sabatier supported a name change but opposed “Konocti.”

Three days later on Dec. 13, the Board of Supervisors sent the formal recommendation letter by email to both the federal and state agencies — the BGN’s Domestic Names Committee and California Advisory Committee on Geographic Names — at 6:51 a.m., according to Chief Deputy County Administrative Officer Matthew Rothstein.

Rothstein provided Lake County News with a copy of this letter, titled “RE: Response to Citizens for Healing’s Proposed Kelseyville-Konocti Name Change.”

The letter included the ballot results on Measure U, as requested by Supervisor Pyska before casting her vote, and explained the board’s reason for supporting the name change. The last two paragraphs read:

“In response to Advisory Measure U, Lake County residents demonstrated their Opposition to the proposed Name Change (70.58% Opposed, 29.42% In Favor), and members of our Board
have concern changing a longstanding and valued town name is a non-trivial matter. However, our collective awareness of the violent acts committed by Kelsey and Stone demands change.

“Therefore, it is our collective Recommendation your Committee Approve the proposed Name Change.”

Later on the morning of Dec. 13, Executive Secretary Shellie Zahniser of the BGN’s Domestic Names Committee acknowledged the receipt of the email, Rothstein reported.

“But the County has not been provided any further updates on the timeline for either the State or Federal Naming Authorities’ decision-making,” Rothstein said in an email to Lake County News dated Jan 6.

For Brown, the fact that the BGN hasn’t acted on it leaves room for the Board of Supervisors to bring it back.

“So yeah, they can bring it back,” said Brown. “They have the obligation to bring it back.”

Email staff reporter Lingzi Chen at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Little Hoover Commission: More data is needed in California’s fight against retail theft

Details
Written by: Little Hoover Commission
Published: 23 January 2025
New state laws regarding organized retail theft and property crime took effect in California on Jan. 1.

Last August, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a “landmark legislative package,” which includes stricter penalties for individuals involved in retail and property theft, sentence enhancements for property damage to businesses, and stronger tools to ensure law enforcement can arrest retail theft suspects.

Although these new laws will make it easier to prosecute retail theft, they don’t address the need for a clearer understanding of retail crime in California.

According to a 2024 Little Hoover Commission report, “Retail Theft: A Data-Driven Response,” more detailed crime data is needed for policymakers to develop an evidence-based response to the issue.

The Little Hoover Commission, California’s independent watchdog agency, released the report after conducting a comprehensive study on retail theft amid reports of rising retail crime in the state and complaints from retailers and law enforcement officials that existing statutes were inadequate.

After looking at available data, the commission found that despite a recent uptick, reported retail theft remained at roughly the same level as during the 2010s and lower than it had been in earlier decades.

Retail theft is undoubtedly underreported, but the degree of underreporting is difficult to determine.

The commission also learned that the state does not consistently collect detailed retail crime data, such as the circumstances surrounding a crime, law enforcement’s response, demographic data about the people arrested, and the final disposition of the case.

The commission commended the Department of Justice for its existing data initiatives, and recommended they be expanded in consultation with experts to include a much higher level of detail.

In addition to data collection, the commission recommended that the state partner with California universities and other nonpartisan research institutions to study preventative measures, rates of underreporting, economic impact, and drivers of public perception.

To read the commission’s full report on Retail Theft implementation and find more information about the commission’s work on the subject, please visit our website here.
  1. Aguiar-Curry seeks to ensure accurate health plan provider directories as part of health equity effort
  2. I’m an economist. Here’s why I’m worried the California insurance crisis could trigger broader financial instability
  3. Clearlake City Council approves new community wildfire protection plan
  • 407
  • 408
  • 409
  • 410
  • 411
  • 412
  • 413
  • 414
  • 415
  • 416
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page