If you read the entire article, the scam is far deeper than pharmaceuticals. It's about bogus claims against industry.
How can you say "it's about bogus claims against the industry" when it is "the industry" supporting the claims, which includes doctors, radiologists, a myriad of other health professionals, pharmaceuticals, lawyers determined to bring justice (for a price), insurance companies who paid for the justice the lawyers brought, legitimate companies who reimbursed the insurance companies then went bankrupt. And why? Because the medical industry did not have a definitive answer. Don't you think the defense put up doctors who could not definitively say "this is a scam and here's the proof"? And present incontrovertible proof or at least documentation sufficient to create a doubt? Of course not, because medicine is an art, open to the personal interpretaion of the artist, not a science.
It is the same as hiring an artist to paint a family portrait. When the outline is done, pay him/her a fee. When the blue tones are done pay another fee. And likewise for the brown, red and yellow tones. Then finally when the thing is done you go to pick it up and say "Good Lord. That's not my family, it looks like the Bundy's." Too bad you still owe the artist $2,000.
The medical industry is the only one I know of that can demand payment and deliver nothing. If I buy furniture that is not delivered, if I pay the plumber who did nothing, I have a claim in court. Not so with the medical industry unless you are braced for years of medical malpractice, which is hard to prove because medicine is an esoteric practice.
The bogus claims against the industry are NOT claims against the medical industry as you suggest and if you read the entire article. Neither doctors or lawyers suffered in the end. If I misinterpreted all this, then send me a list of doctors that paid millions and lawyers that paid millions or either that went out of business as a result of these claims.