Weighing in on one of the biggest controversies of the health of the decade, a scientific committee appointed by the court concluded this week that, on the basis of available evidence, silicone breast implants do not appear to elicit immune diseases such as lupus.
judge Sam Pointer J. of the US District Court in Alabama, the panel appointed in October 1996 to examine the scientific evidence in lawsuits by women claiming their implants caused debilitating symptoms ranging from fatigue for painful joints. Pointer asked panelists - a toxicologist, an immunologist, an epidemiologist and rheumatologist - to examine whether the expert testimony of applicants "provide [s] reliable and reasonable scientific basis" to conclude that silicone breast implants " cause or aggravate "systemic diseases such as lupus or connective tissue disease, which could explain the reported symptoms. The Committee also reviewed the evidence for "atypical" disease of the connective tissue and immune, the report, which was released on November 30th.
After reviewing 40 studies in their fields and hearing scientists witnesses, experts have concluded that they could find no link between implants and disease. For example, the toxicology report's summary states that "the preponderance of data ... indicate ... that the implants do not alter the incidence or severity of the autoimmune disease." And the data analysis grouped many epidemiological studies found "no association" between implants and connective or immune diseases, the report said.
"We are happy," said Doug Schoettinger, managing trial counsel for Dow Corning, an implant manufacturer. "I think this will help to end this controversy." But everyone does not read the report in this way. "Nowhere where they say breast implants are safe" said Robert Garry, an immunologist at Tulane University in New Orleans who studies women with breast implants. "They have found flaws in almost all science," he said. "They keep the fairly wide open for further research."
Dow Corning, which is in bankruptcy, has proposed a regulation his pursuit of $ 3.2 billion there 3 weeks, although applicants may still choose to go to trial. the panel report "will certainly have an impact" on those and thousands of other pending cases said Professor Margaret Berger Brooklyn Law School. First, however, the judge will ask the panel, and it could end up including the evidence in its decision; Lower court judges then decide to follow the decision in their own cases. "It will take some time to see what the effects are," says Berger.
0 Komentar