As thousands of Post-Engle cases wind their way through the Florida court system, Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds, Lorillard and Liggett & Myers are facing daily challenges.  After years of priding themselves on winning most of  the lawsuits filed against them through historic “scorched earth” tactics, it appears that those days are over (and perhaps it is time for Big Tobacco to rewrite that old playbook).

Here are just a few of the highlights for the past week:

(more…)

First, let me start with a disclaimer of sorts. I admire people who have professions I wish I had; writers, for example. I admire someone who can combine words on a page and make me think or help me escape.

I thought, though, that if you chose to write non-fiction it required you to know something about the subject.  If you were uninformed about the subject, I assumed you researched it. If the subject was something involving important social, political or medical issues, you certainly would research it.

Right?

Apparently, not all reporters feel that way. A Palm Beach Post reporter wrote in yesterday’s paper something about which he clearly knows little or nothing. The title was: “What part of ‘hazardous’ don’t smokers get?”

This is a story criticizing smokers and casting judgment on those smokers who have sued Big Tobacco; the “Engle” plaintiffs. It seems evident to me this reporter clearly spent no time researching and brought an entire collection of “baggage” into his article.

The only tangible piece of information the reporter provides is that his parents smoked and “…they were lifelong slaves to — and, ultimately, victims of — the habit.” This statement certainly demonstrates facts, but completely misses the mark on any shred of insight.

The reporter apologizes for knocking “a possibly dying woman as she struggles for her next breath”, but he clearly knows nothing about the case, trial, or facts of the lawsuit filed by Cindy Naugle. This reporter also must have no respect for the intelligence of jurors who after hearing weeks of evidence, must have been outraged by the conduct of Big Tobacco, causing them to render a $300 million verdict.

All of this demonstrates at least one central issue. Before “dashing off” this article, want of any facts, the reporter could not have done even a modicum of research. Before criticizing an entire class of people, perhaps he should try researching and reading, just a little.

I have read many, many documents produced by Big Tobacco and they are full of thoughts, plans, and schemes to hopelessly addict people; keep them addicted; lure young children to become smokers; and to deceive the public about the dangers of smoking.

For those who who want to know facts about Big Tobacco and not hyperbole, I recommend the following sites:

Tobacco Documents

Legacy Tobacco Documents Library

British American Tobacco Documents Archive

Tobacco Control Archives

Tobacco Archives

Philip Morris USA

The Legacy Tobacco Documents

The Honorable Judge Gladys Kessler’s Findings Against Big Tobacco

So, to the Palm Beach Post writer I can only recommend that perhaps you should read more than you write…at least for a while.

Two bills (Senate Bill No. 2120 and House Bill No. 1285) were introduced in March of 2010 by Senator Justice of the Tampa Bay area and Representative Thompson of Orlando. These bills seek to impose civil and criminal penalties for the sale of toys, jewelry and other products intended for children that contain excessive levels of cadmium.

These legislative efforts follow on the heels of a number of recalls of products that contained excessive cadmium levels, a known carcinogen, by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. As more and more products are imported into this country from China, all parents need to be alert and exercise caution. We work so hard to baby-proof our homes and do everything possible to shield our children from harm, so it is quite disconcerting to think that a cheap toy or piece of costume jewelry could place them at risk.

We all must ask ourselves whether the cost savings from purchasing cheap , foreign goods are really worth it, when foreign manufacturers, time and again, have shown a total lack of care about the safety of their products or a commitment to operating reputable businesses. Sadly, most of these manufacturers are able to currently operate with impunity, because it is very, very difficult to enforce our safety standards or hold a foreign manufacturer liable in our court system.

I applaud the efforts of our legislators to address this very serious problem. Even if we cannot police disreputable manufacturers beyond our borders, we can at least encourage retailers in Florida to ask tough questions before buying and selling these products. Which, ultimately, may protect all of us, and put these foreign manufacturers of defective goods out of business.

In Alachua County, located in the middle of the Sunshine State, a jury heard evidence from Big Tobacco in defense of deceased smoker. They rendered verdicts totaling $16 million against Big Tobacco.

The jury did not believe Big Tobacco.

The spin, the deceit, or the rewriting history apparently did not help Big Tobacco.

Amanda Jean Hall sued Big Tobacco because cigarettes hopelessly addicted her husband, Arthur, and cigarette smoking led to cancer in as many as five areas of his body. Cigarettes killed Arthur Hall.

Dennis Murphy, one of Big Tobacco’s lawyers, told the jury: “The case is not about whether smoking can be addictive,” he said. “It can be.  But not everyone who smokes becomes addicted.”

What Mr.Murphy left out is the history of Big Tobacco telling Americans that smoking was NOT addictive. When they now need to be honest, they “spin” the truth.

Mr. Murphy told jurors that “the conduct of RJ Reynolds had no effect on Mr. Hall”.

So, producing the “best drug delivery system ever invented”; denying cigarettes are addictive; denying that cigarettes cause cancer; producing ads that romanticized smoking; all the other outrageous conduct on the part of Big Tobacco; Mr. Murphy maintains none of that “had any effect” on Mr. Hall.

The jurors heard all Big Tobacco’s evidence, but they apparently did not accept the spin, the the manipulation or the Big Tobacco’s revisions on history.

The jurors delivered a verdict which probably went something like: we find on behalf of the plaintiffs in the amount of $3.5 million in human damages and $12.5 million in punitive damages.

Things were bound to get hot for Big Tobacco in Florida. Our juries have good noses for “spin”.

Ya gotta love those guys at Big Tobacco. Deny, deny, deny. If that doesn’t work, spin, spin, spin. If that doesn’t work, try reinventing history.

In Florida, jurors have been hearing the truth about Big Tobacco antics over the years; and deny, spin, and lies is no longer working for them.

Thousands of smoking victims were required to file individual lawsuits against the Big Tobacco companies a couple of years ago, after the Supreme Court’s decision in the Engle case. Much to the chagrin of Big Tobacco, those cases are going to trial and Florida judges are trying their level best to allow sick and dying victims the opportunity to pursue justice in court.

Big Tobacco does not want anyone to know about the things they have been doing for 70 years.

They do not want jurors to see the memos talking about cigarettes being the single best drug delivery system ever invented; all the while Big Tobacco was denying that cigarettes were addictive.

Big Tobacco does not want jurors to see the memos where they analyzed the “youth market”. Where they discussed “the real need to become more aggressive against young adult males in major metro markets”. Big Tobacco does not want the light of day to see the studies where they discussed strategies for increasing their market shares with “14-15, 16-17, 18-20 age segments”.

Big Tobacco is desperate to deny jurors the opportunity to see the decades of publications in which Big Tobacco repeatedly told the public that smoking cigarettes was not addictive; smoking cigarettes was not dangerous to your health; and, in fact, smoking cigarettes was actually healthy for you.

Big Tobacco keeps losing trial, after trial, after trial; because once an unbiased public sees the truth, the written evidence, of Big Tobacco’s decade’s long campaign of deceit and irresponsibility, good and honest citizens can reach only one conclusion:

We find in favor of the plaintiff…

A recent article by MSNBC.com suggests drivers are disoriented and have problems deciding what to do in an emergency with cars that display fancy technology and controls such as keyless ignition. In fact in the BMWiDrive, the control functions for the radio and air conditioning were so baffling that if forced drivers to take their eyes off the road.

Shifting from neutral to drive or reverse isn’t what it used to be. Drivers now have to push a button to start their car and most drivers are unprepared for what to do in the event of an emergency.

According to MSNBC, an off-duty California Highway Patrolman and his family were killed when his rental Lexus ES350 sedan accelerated suddenly and crashed into rush hour traffic at 120 mph. Toyota blames the accident on the accelerator pedal, but the deaths are also a major factor in not being able to control a modern car. We used to be able to shift the car into neutral or turn off the engine. However, the driver of the Lexus was unable to shift the car into neutral or switch off the engine because with the ES350’s engine, you would have to press and hold the “Stop/Start” button for three seconds, an action that is not obvious and could be difficult to accomplish at high speeds. Another problem is that Lexus’s shifter is curved and not the typically expected straight line.

Consumer Reports immediately put into action a five fixes plan for carmakers following this incident. They suggest that auto manufactures:

• Make it simpler to turn off the engine in an emergency;
• Require a minimum distance between the gas pedal and the floorboard;
• Engineer cars so a sustained braking force can stop a car in a reasonable distance even with the accelerator pedal fully depressed;
• Require sufficient brake pedal pressure before a car can be shifted from Park;
• Simplify shifting into Neutral.

Consumer Reports states that “finding Neutral should be intuitive and obvious, but the advent of gated and electronic shifters can make finding Neutral in a panic confusing. You shouldn’t have to read the owners manual to figure out how to use the shifter.”

What can the consumer do until some of these problems are worked out:

• Read your owner’s manual carefully;
• Sit in your vehicle, with the owner’s manual and physically work through the various operations of the gadgets in the car;
• Become very familiar with the shifting mechanism in your car;
• Know how to shift to neutral in the event of sudden acceleration;
• Test your braking system in an empty parking lot — try fast stops;
• Never turn off the ignition in the event of sudden acceleration. In most cars, this locks the steering or makes steering much more difficult;
• Never use your cell phone while driving, unless you have hands free operation;
• Never text while driving.

In a video we produced, Attorney Cal Warriner discussed the practice of pain pump manufacturers promoting the use of continuous flow infusion pain pumps for uses never approved by the Food and Drug Administration. In fact, pain pump manufacturers were, in some cases, told to remove orthopedic use from their written materials.

Tragically, pain pump manufacturers went to what appears to be substantial efforts to market their pain pumps for use directly in the joint space (intra-articular) and went from doctor to doctor; from conference to conference; promoting this unapproved use.

The FDA now has issued another notification, this time in the form of a video, which concludes the manufacturers used the pain pumps in a way not approved and recommended drugs for use in the pumps for which they conducted no testing for the intended their use.

Yet, these same manufacturers continue to argue to judges that they should be dismissed from lawsuits. This is being argued before a jury can hear that their use of the pain pumps was unapproved and their selection of drugs for us in the pumps was untested. Their attitude is typical of trying to pervert the law in the interest of corporate avoidance for their poor judgment and circumvention of federal guidelines.

Japanese auto giant, Toyota, has been under fire in the last few months over recall woes for sticky brake pedals and mats that entrap the accelerator pedal. Twenty deaths have been blamed and linked to the faulty gas pedal and YouTube has videos and 911 recordings of people whose Toyota has sped out of control.

Our faith in a brand that for years has ensured safety and quality is now tarnished. The lack of importance Toyota initially put on the recalls and their quickness to repair these defects has consumers fuming. Toyota is also accused of taking far to long to recall the cars in the first place. Reports on sticky pedals in Toyota’s have been documented back to 2008. It has recently been acknowledged that Toyota has known about customers complaining about sticky accelerator pedals in the UK since late 2008.  Toyota only went public on these complaints after British government safety officials alerted US counterparts who were handling a massive deluge of complaints about the sticking accelerators. This exposure led to Toyota’s recall of 12 of its popular vehicles, with some 2004 models being involved in the recent recalls. Toyota has recalled nearly 8.5 million vehicles since November 2009 around the world.

(more…)

Pain pump manufacturers did it wrong. If we are practical, the conclusion is inescapable… pain pump manufacturers have been sued in hundreds of cases because they deserved it. They gambled…they were caught… and they should pay patients who have suffered devastating injuries. Opinion? I suppose, but let’s look at the facts and you decide.

The manufacturers would tell you they are the victims of trial lawyers and that no scientific data exists that will reliably relate use of their pain pumps to a condition called chondrolysis. In fact, pain pump manufacturers across the country have been telling judges, opposing counsel and anyone else they can that any evidence their pumps caused chondrolysis is simple coincidence, happenstance, accident. In other words, do not look at the little man behind the curtain; listen only to the “great and mighty Oz”.

Is this true? Has the mighty Oz spoken? No and yes. The mighty Oz is certainly speaking, but the truth is certainly not found in the Land of Oz.

Pain pumps work, at least as sold by the manufacturers, by the use of a catheter attached to a pump at one end and inserted into the joint space at the other end. Pain medications, typically marcaine or bupivacaine, are inserted in the pump and injected into the joint space over a period of 48 to 72 hours. Based on this design and the use promoted by pain pump manufacturers, what is the one thing, amongst all others, you would want to know? Go ahead, you know, say it — right, you would want to know if it is safe to inject these drugs into the joint for the length of time suggested.

Did pain pump manufacturers conduct studies to determine whether using their pain pumps in the ways they recommended would cause injury to patients? They did not. I know, I was shocked, too. That’s right, they sold the product, recommended to physicians the way to use the product, but they never studied what complications to which patients might be subjected.

In 1985, a study was conducted, which gauged the effect of bupivacaine on articular cartilage. As a result of that study, the investigators determined that increasing concentrations of bupivacaine caused damage to cartilage. They recommended further study. Did pain pump manufacturers know about this study in 2000? Of course they did.

A study was published in June of 2009, Postoperative Chondrolysis of the Knee; 3 Case Reports and a Review of the Literature, by Eric Fester et al. In that study, the authors review all the literature relating chondrolysis to pain pump use and their own findings in (3) patients.

In their study, through their own experience, training, and a review of the available literature, they concluded that chondrolysis suffered by their patients was caused by the use of pain pumps with bupivacaine. The conclusions drawn by these researchers are interesting:

“In summary, there is currently a significant amount of in vitro and in vivo evidence that the use of pain pumps with bupivacaine and epinephrine may lead to significant chondrolysis when placed into a joint. We agree with Bruce Reidel that one contemplating the use of intra-articular medications must be confident with their morbidity. Until this association between intra-articular pain pumps and chondrolysis is better understood and characterized, we do not recommend the use of intra-articular pain pumps. Also, further research is necessary on the potential deleterious effects of single bupivacaine joint injections, as well as other local anesthetics placed intra-articularly.”

(more…)