The Mobile Register has a devastating expose of the asbestosis screening mills (Jan. 21 and links therein). Dr. David Egilman, who had testified for over 100 plaintiffs, has switched sides in the wake of abuses.
Over the years, he said, as the trial lawyers who hired him sent along the medical records of the plaintiffs, Egilman became increasingly troubled by what he saw.
“I realized at some point that some of these people are not really sick,” Egilman said in a telephone interview last week. “From a policy perspective, I’m interested in justice. If all the people who are not sick get money, then there won’t be enough money for the people who are sick — that’s the main issue.”
Egilman said he believes that screening companies do two things that violate good public policy: They help generate tens of thousands of plaintiffs who aren’t suffering from asbestos-related illness, thus draining billions of dollars from those who are ill; and they can create substantial health concerns on the part of those who get tested.
The Register also interviews Dr. Greg Nayden, who quadrupled his salary by returning a 100% hit rate in his asbestosis screenings, and uncovers a number of similar incredible tales. (Eddie Curran, “Diagnosing for dollars?”, Mobile Register, Apr. 4). As Professor David Bernstein points out, the failure of judges to enforce existing standards for expert testimony in the asbestos context has made such abuses possible. (“Keeping Junk Science Out of the Asbestos Litigation”, 31 Pepperdine L. Rev. 11 (2003)).
Comments are closed.