They're trying to say that Purdue/PUSH gave him "off the books" medication. This makes little sense for a few reasons.
1. If it is herpes, you can't cure it.
2. They say they kept it off the books so no one would find out he had it - well medical records aren't public and are protected by law, so there isn't a need to keep it off the books.
3. A doctor is also not a pharmacist. Unless you are now saying a doctor called up the Purdue pharmacy and asked for medicine on the side without a prescription.
4. Purdue has no responsibility in alerting the public of someone testing positive for an STD (again, medical records are protected by law).
It's still confusing - they are throwing around chlamydia and herpes interchangeably.
The most logical reason for including Purdue is that they can settle easily.