When porch pirates steal medicine instead of holiday gifts79%

By Sydney Lupkin0%

12/24/2025, 6:30:16 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Availability Heuristic, and Anchoring Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 32.4% saturation with 304 hits. Analysis detected 990 faulty-reasoning hits from 937 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.7% and a BS Rank of 79% (4,605 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 79.00% of the article peer group.

Carmen Peterson's son Ethan is a big fan of Elmo and Mickey Mouse Clubhouse. 
And although Ethan is nonverbal, he loves to sing along in his own way. 
"He's a really fun-loving 8-year-old. 
He doesn't speak, but he gets his point across," Peterson says. 
Ethan has a rare genetic disorder  Syngap1  which, among other things, causes a kind of seizure that can make him drop to the ground without warning. 
"Everything just kind of shorts out for a moment," Peterson says. 
"And the danger of that  and I've seen this  is him falling on hardwood floors, concrete, off of stairs, like all of these things." 
She says he's gotten hurt and she's had to rush him to the emergency room. 
Ethan takes a medicine called Epidiolex that prevents these seizures. 
But last holiday season, a thief stole it off the family's front porch in Charlotte, N.C. 
Peterson remembers finding the empty box and then checking her Ring doorbell camera footage. 
"I see this guy walking off  and I am just livid," she says. 
Then, she had to figure out how to get this medicine  worth $1,800  replaced so her son didn't miss a dose. 
It turned out to be a challenge. 
How many stolen packages? 
December is a busy time for package deliveries and for porch pirates who steal them. 
Sometimes the thieves run off with mail-order medication instead of getting an iPad or a Labubu. 
E-commerce took off during the pandemic, and December remains the busiest time of the year for package deliveries, according to the U.S. Postal Service. 
Still, it can be tricky to get the whole picture when it comes to package theft. 
As easy as it is to buy stuff online, getting it to customers is actually really complicated. 
That's because so many people and companies interact with a package before it's delivered, according to Ben Stickle, a professor of criminal justice administration at Middle Tennessee University. 
"So it's really hard to get, you know, what happens from the point that you click a button to when it gets delivered, all put back together with enough detail to find out when and where these thefts are occurring and then actually do something about it," he says. 
Stickle worked on a study with the Postal Service published earlier this year, and says that victims of theft wind up reporting it to different places that don't share information with each other or even necessarily record the missing package as "theft." 
And sometimes victims don't report it at all. 
"There's a lot of packages stolen," he says, explaining that according to security research company SafeWise, it's about 250,000 packages every day. 
Stickle has worked with SafeWise. 
The Postal Service report estimated that at least 58 million packages were stolen in 2024. 
"So what are the odds that one of those, unbeknownst to the thief, has some type of medication in it?" 
Nobody really knows for sure, he says. 
Ways to lower theft risk 
So what can you do? 
Stickle says scheduling deliveries for when you're home and having a delivery spot that's hidden are good ideas. 
Even a locker for your porch that doesn't lock is a good deterrent. 
"If a thief can see that there's a package, even if it's an envelope on your porch from the roadway, it seems to be far more likely that it's going to be stolen," he says. 
According to Express Scripts and Optum Rx, which are two companies that offer mail-order pharmacy services, medication theft is pretty rare. 
CVS Caremark, another company that ships prescriptions by mail, said it offers customers package tracking to prevent theft, but didn't answer NPR's question about how common medication theft is. 
Pharmacies, including Walgreens, say they offer order tracking and use discreet packaging to help prevent theft. 
Customers can also opt to require a signature when their medicines are delivered. 
Making sure patients don't miss a dose is a top priority, says Stryker Awtry, the director of Loss Prevention and Transformation for Optum Pharmacy, part of Optum Rx. 
"Especially during the holiday seasons when deliveries surge, we want to make sure we build in peace of mind for our customers," he says. 
"So if a theft were to happen, No. 1, contact the pharmacy right away." 
He says to also report the theft to your prescribing doctor and local law enforcement. 
A lost prescription replaced 
As for Carmen Peterson in North Carolina, when she called her insurer's pharmacy to get Ethan's medicine replaced, the answer was no. 
But Ethan missing a dose and having a seizure that put him in the emergency room again? 
Not an option for her. 
"It's just like it's one of those things that you just don't have a choice," she says. 
If forced to, she would have found the money to buy the medicine herself. 
"It was just unfortunate that the  company was so ready and kind of willing to just wash their hands of it because they felt like they had done what they were contracted to do, which is deliver the medication." 
That company, Liviniti Pharmacy, said it couldn't comment on the Peterson family's experience because of patient privacy laws. 
Unwilling to give up, Peterson reported the theft everywhere and made noise about it  including on her local news stations. 
That worked. 
Jazz Pharmaceuticals, the company that makes the drug Ethan needs, saw the stories and replaced it for her within a week. 
Now, she recommends getting important medicines delivered to a P.O. box, a workplace or just going to the pharmacy to pick it up yourself. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Sydney Lupkin: 3.7%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias6.2%This article: 8.6%Sydney Lupkin: 5.1%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic8.6%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.4%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Sydney Lupkin: 7.1%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect5.7%This article: 4.3%Sydney Lupkin: 2.1%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error4.3%This article: 2.2%Sydney Lupkin: 4.0%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect2.2%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.1%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.9%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%Sydney Lupkin: 3.7%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion2.5%This article: 5.8%Sydney Lupkin: 10.7%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 4.7%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.1%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 2.4%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.5%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.3%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.8%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.9%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.8%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.9%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 1.1%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.7%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 2.6%Sydney Lupkin: 3.9%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal2.6%This article: 28.4%Sydney Lupkin: 10.1%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority28.4%This article: 32.4%Sydney Lupkin: 5.4%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion32.4%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.5%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.9%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.8%Sydney Lupkin: 1.7%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma1.8%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 3.4%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.2%Sydney Lupkin: 2.2%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.2%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.5%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.4%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Sydney Lupkin: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%

937 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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