The Hunt for A Cure: W&C responds to WSJ article

The Wall Street Journal, which is in the business of putting asbestos trial lawyers out business, contacted me over a year ago. They wanted to run an article about my donations to medical research.

As a journalist myself in college, it didn’t take long for me to figure out their angle. They wanted to show that somehow my practice of sponsoring medical research, as opposed to spending oodles on TV and Google ads, was “fishy” if not “rotten.”

The result of that year long quest appeared today in the crusty WSJ under the byline of reporter Dionne Searcey. The title: “Mesothelioma Doctors, Lawyers Hunt for Valuable Asbestos Cases.” 

Right away you get a feel for the slant. We are “hunters.”  Now, I’ve gotten to know Ms. Searcey fairly well and my guess is she didn’t write the headline.  Contrary to the splenetic anti-lawyer bias of the WSJ’s editorial board,  Ms. Searcey actually went the extra mile to check her facts, question her own biases, and listen to contrary points of view. To her credit, she even previewed with me the accuracy of the quotes she attributed to me and others.  In sum, she has shown a degree of professionalism I did not expect from her employer, and I respect her methods greatly.

But I wanted to clarify just a few points.

First, we wouldn't be in this mess if the asbestos industry hadn’t created it.  Nor would we be fussing about the ethics of sponsoring medical research if the asbestos industry itself had not steadfastly and stupidly refused to clean up their horrific mess.

Second, if the parties responsible for the asbestos cancer mess won’t clean it up, who will? The Federal government has not invested in medical research commensurate with the size of the problem, their responsibility (for Navy vets, meso is a “service connected disability) or their own fault. Meanwhile, the number of people diagnosed with meso is “too small” for Big Pharma to justify any serious investment. The labor unions are broke. If not the patients and their advocates, who will step up? 

Third, if money curries favor, from a strict profits and losses perspective, why hasn’t the asbestos industry donated to research?  A few years ago, Dr. Cameron was invited to speak to 600 asbestos defense lawyers, insurance adjusters and company reps.  He talked about the medical and ethical benefits of sponsoring research. How much did they pony up? Zero. Now, that’s “disgraceful.”

The asbestos industry is notorious for corrupting the medical and scientific literature with false and deceptive articles they paid for designed to prove to juries that asbestos is as benign as mother’s milk. If anyone knows how to curry favor with money, it’s the asbestos industry.

It simply boggles my mind that the industry, after 50 years of wasting tens of billions of dollars on phony research and medical mercenary “experts,” still has yet to see the economic benefits from finding a cure.  Put lawyers like me out of business! Save asbestos-tainted companies from bankruptcy! Spare millions of people agony, misery and death! It makes dollars and sense.

Fourth, the only “stakeholders” that really don’t want to see a cure for mesothelioma are the legions of “bill to kill” defense lawyers. They get paid by the hour. It’s in their economic interest to drag out tedious, life-sucking litigation, as the John Johnson case sadly but clearly demonstrates.

That said, over the past 25 years, I have met several honorable defense lawyers who agree with me that their clients should indeed invest in a cure.  They agree with me that they should find a way to resolve meritorious cases early before racking up thousands and thousands in legal fees. And they agree that it makes no sense at this late date for asbestos defendants to invest in crackpot “experts” to gin up junk science to bamboozle juries, when the money should instead be invested in cleaning up their horrific mess. 

We are quick to forgive in this country.  People, like corporations, make mistakes. What’s unforgivable is the perpetuation of that mistake by stubbornly refusing to own up to it.

Finally, maybe I’m wrong about the “benefits” of keeping meso patients alive. Unfortunately, as long as certain states limit or eliminate the damages available in wrongful death cases, then the bad guys will indeed have an economic incentive to hasten their victim’s demise.  It’s no secret that here in California the asbestos companies generally settle wrongful death claims for far, far less than they do for living claims.  The law encourages this wicked behavior.  In this dark and dusty light, it’s no wonder the bad guys don’t invest in a cure.

My firm’s motto has always been: “Asbestos Lawyers for Life.”  Yes, it’s in my firm’s interest to help my clients live long and prosper.  The day that in this great country we hold in contempt efforts to cure cancer but applaud and reward the cancer creators, well, that’s a day I’d rather put off, and I don’t think I’m alone.

RGW

5/6/13

Hunters for Justice and a Cure for Meso: The John Johnson "Fight Meso" Family, sponsors of the Dana Point Grand Prix

Canada Drops Opposition to Chrysotile Addition to List of Controlled Hazardous Substances

The United Nation’s list of Controlled Hazardous Substances is maintained by an international treaty made up of representatives from around the world known as the Rotterdam Convention. The Convention’s purpose is to set standards of protocol for the regulation of global trade of hazardous materials in an effort to protect human health and the environment.

Chrysotile has been on the list of considered additions to the list of Controlled Hazardous Substances since the Convention’s first meeting in 2004. However, in order for chrysotile to be added, the vote needs to be unanimous among the represented countries. The addition of chrysotile has been strongly opposed by countries with large stakes in the asbestos industry including Brazil, Canada, China, India, Kazakhstan and Russia. Inclusion does not imply that the substance has been banned, but that its import, export and use is severely regulated.

India withdrew its objection to the addition of chrysotile at the 2011 Rotterdam Convention, but Canada, which was exporting thousands of tons of chrysotile asbestos to other countries, objected on the basis that it was a propaganda ploy by groups wishing to benefit from the trade of replacement products such as cellulose and ceramic.

That same year the last operating asbestos mine in Canada ceased operations and the Canadian government committed to lend the mine $58 million to restart production. But in 2012, the newly elected government announced it would not honor the commitment. The new Ministry also announced that it would no longer oppose the addition of chrysotile to the list of Controlled Hazardous Substances.

The sixth meeting of the Rotterdam Convention runs from April 28 to May 10, 2013 in Geneva, Switzerland. While it is unlikely that other countries in opposition will follow suit, Canada’s change in stance is an important step toward placing of public health above corporate gains.

Chrysotile asbestos is a fibrous magnesium silicate mineral that is the most abundant variety of asbestos found on earth. The largest known natural deposits of chrysotile are located in Quebec, Canada and the Ural Mountains in Russia. Chrysotile is most commonly exported to developing countries which have failed to implement proper safety regulations to protect citizens.

Due to the unyielding of vested corporate interests, the danger of chrysotile asbestos continues to remain a contentious topic. However, in February 2013, the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer called for an end to all uses of asbestos reiterating all forms of asbestos are carcinogenic and can cause asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma.

Avid Surfer and Former Drywaller Awarded $26.6 Million by Los Angeles Jury

San Pedro, CA, March 20, 2013—Asbestos cancer litigation law firm Worthington & Caron, P.C. today announced a verdict in the case of a 62 year-old former drywaller diagnosed with mesothelioma, a cancer caused by asbestos. The Los Angeles Superior Court jury that heard the case returned its verdict Tuesday, awarding $26.6 million to Mike and his wife.

Mike testified that he worked as a drywaller in northern Southern California from 1967, while he was still attending Madison High School, through 1993—with frequent breaks for extended surfing trips to Hawaii and Mexico. He worked at countless residential and commercial jobsites during the construction “boom” that occurred in north county in the 1970s, the same time that cancer-causing asbestos was used in many construction products including joint compound, fire-rated drywall, caulk, stucco, roofing mastic and asbestos cement pipe.

“With all the trades working on top of each other trying to finish one job and move on to the next, it was always dusty,” Mike recalled, “It wasn’t until I became a lead maintenance mechanic at UC San Diego and attended a class on job safety in 2003 that I learned that so many of the materials used on the jobs back then contained asbestos.” 

The case (LASC case # BC486980) was filed on June 20, 2012 by Worthington & Caron and co-counsel Simon, Greenstone, Panatier & Bartlett. Over 30 defendants were named in the case. Settlements were reached with a number of defendants prior to trial. Stucco manufacturer, Highland Stucco and Lime Products, Inc., the sole remaining defendant at trial, argued that other companies and even Mike himself were responsible for his exposure to asbestos. But the jury ultimately assessed blame on Highland for its role in subjecting Mike and other members of the public to its dangerous products.

“I was surprised to learn at trial just how much asbestos was in stucco,” Mike stated, “even though I rarely worked hands-on with the stuff, I was exposed to dust when the bags were dumped into large mixers and when we had to scrape off areas of over-spray that came into the homes through windows and doors.”

Mike is grateful for the jury’s award and for the hard work of his legal team, but would gladly trade it for the return of his health. Prior to his diagnosis in May 2012, Mike enjoyed his job at UCSD and had no plans of retiring. He also continued to indulge his life-long passion for surfing, hitting the waves on the iconic surf breaks of north county in Southern California two or more times a week.

After receiving his diagnosis, Mike sought treatment with thoracic surgeon Dr. Robert Cameron, Director of the Comprehensive Mesothelioma Program at the UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. Mike underwent the lung-sparing pleurectomy/decortication surgery performed by Dr. Cameron in July 2012. Thereafter, he underwent six weeks of radiation under the direction of UCLA radiation oncologist Dr. Michael Selch. “I was one of the first patients to get radiation with UCLA’s new Tomo-Therapy equipment”, Mike said, “Dr. Cameron and his team are on the cutting edge when it comes to treating meso. There are world-renown medical centers in Southern California, but for mesothelioma, the experts are at UCLA." 

Mike recognizes that asbestos companies like Highland have historically refused to support research into cures for mesothelioma, “they would rather pay attorneys to blame guys like me who were exposed to their products for causing our own illness!” Mike vows to support mesothelioma research conducted at the Pacific Meso Center under the direction Dr. Robert Cameron: “I’ve personally benefitted from Dr. Cameron’s research supported by patients before me affected by this disease. Now it’s my turn. With a little luck, I’ll be around long enough to benefit from the research they do with my support."