“Junk science apparently attracts trial lawyers the same way blood in the water attracts hungry sharks,” wrote Angela Logomasini in a recent op-ed that ran in Town Hall. Logomasini’s op-ed discusses how trial lawyers often armed with research that contradicts the larger body of evidence walk off with millions in legal fees. The lawsuits against the weed-killer Roundup offers a prime example of trial lawyers using “discredited hazard assessment,” to make millions.
In a similar fashion to the Roundup suits, we are now seeing a growing number of lawsuits focused on ethylene oxide (EO) on the horizon. EO is a chemical used to sterilize more than 50 percent of the nation’s medical supplies—including masks, bandages, ventilators, and more.
“One thing that could help stymie these suits would be for the EPA to retract its flawed IRIS assessment. Otherwise, trial lawyers may succeed in advancing false claims to build more and more legal challenges—just like they did with Roundup,” Logomasini wrote. “The implication for consumers is not good: more medical supply shortages that will leave us less prepared to address health challenges now and in the future.”