STAT64%

Michigan Supreme Court ruling allows probe into Lilly insulin pricing 43%

By Ed Silverman72%

8/2/2026, 11:14:14 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 40.3% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 279 faulty-reasoning hits from 139 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 41.4% and a BS Rank of 43% (14,605 of 25,564 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 57.10% of the article peer group.

A divided Michigan Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the state’s attorney general may investigate Eli Lilly over its pricing practices for insulin. 
In its 4-to-3 decision, the court rejected a lower court decision that prevented Michigan Attorney General Dana Nesel from proceeding with a probe that began four years ago. 
At the time, Nessel cited state consumer protection laws, alleging the drug maker had artificially increased the price of its insulin medication. 
Lilly was accused of charging “grossly” excessive prices for three different insulin products  Lispro, Humalog and Basaglar  that forced some patients to ration or forego insulin, restrict their diets or buy less-effective alternatives. 
These practices led to “serious disability and even death in some patients,” the state wrote in court documents at the time. 
Confirmation Bias
20.1%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
7.2%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
40.3%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
16.5%
False Dilemma
20.1%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
40.3%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
15.1%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
25.2%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
15.8%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

139 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.