More recently, a 2017 survey by Porter Research, 96 percent of healthcare workers said drug diversion occurs frequently in healthcare. And 65 percent believe most diversion goes undetected.



Pill mills are even worse. In the book “American Pain,” journalist John Temple describes the impact of Florida pill mills on the east coast a decade ago.

“Florida pumped millions upon millions of doses of those narcotics—oxycodone, mostly—northward, not through a major criminal organization like the cartels of Mexico, but via thousands of individuals who streamed up and down Interstate 75 or flew from Tri-Sate Airport in Huntington, West Virginia, to Miami International, on a flight nicknamed the Oxy Express,” Temple wrote.



And none of this is remotely new. In the book “Dark Paradise,” historian David Courtwright explains: “Diversion from maintenance programs posed a real danger, given that perhaps half of all licitly manufactured barbiturates and amphetamines ended up on the black market.”



So the claim by Attorney General Jeff Sessions that "It’s a common sense idea: the more a drug is diverted, the more its production should be limited” is both simplistic and misguided.



Sessions is assuming that limiting production will reduce diversion. But economic theory suggests the opposite may be true. Reducing supply leads to scarcity, which generally increases value. This in turn may create stronger incentives to divert more opioids into the black market.



Moreover, there is no evidence that people who divert medication are aware of and responding to DEA production quotas. Instead, the consensus is that people divert what they need and think they can get away with. In other words, diversion is an exercise in what economists call the “Tragedy of the Commons,” in which individuals each use a collective resource for their own benefit without regard for the effects on others.



And Sessions’ idea implies that reducing production won’t have any effect on medical practice. But there is an abundance of evidence to the contrary. There is an ongoing shortage of injectable opioids at hospitals around the country. And despite claims to the contrary, opioid analgesics cannot always be replaced or substituted with other pain relievers.



Thus, more intelligent and nuanced approaches are needed. For instance, the NIH is sponsoring research to use advanced data analytics to detect drug theft and diversion in hospitals. Similar efforts at wholesalers, distributors, pharmacies and dispensaries are worth considering.



So while diversion is a major problem, it is neither new nor limited to individual consumers with prescriptions for opioids or other medications that have a street value or abuse potential. The seemingly obvious response of reducing supply could easily backfire. Instead, securing the entire supply chain, from manufacturer through distributor to point-of-sale to consumers, is a vital step in making sure that only the intended recipients of pharmaceutical drugs have access to them.