Since the early twentieth century, manufacturers and distributors of toxic products have sought to discredit research linking
their products with disease. At the same time they conducted research designed to demonstrate minimal risks associated with their
products. Much of this activity came about by or through corporate retained attorneys, whose endeavors are the subject of this
dissertation. Such attorney involvement has allowed for shielding undesired results through the court-sanctioned attorney right to
secrecy. In many cases, this legal participation and even management of medical research has changed the topography of the medical
literature, distorting it toward the null hypothesis for disease potential of the subject materials. This is because attorneys, whether
they are defense or plaintiff, only sought credible evidence for their position at trial or in regulatory practice, not the advancement of
science. Furthermore, the distortion is primarily one-sided, toward the defense of toxic substances. This results from the virtually
unlimited financial backing defense lawyers have from large corporations, while plaintiff counsel are almost uniformly reluctant to spend
their own money. To date, only limited historical accounts about this attorney effort have been published, largely because of the veil of
secrecy created by attorney privileges. This dissertation seeks to look behind the veil to examine the full range of legal activities in
case studies of five substances—silica, tobacco, asbestos, chromium, and benzene. These activities include lawyers identifying, hiring,
and controlling experts, preparing contracts for research that limited public disclosure, managing research, editing final research
papers, harassing opposing experts, and manipulating regulations and workers' compensation laws. This lifting of the veil is possible
primarily through disclosures found in bankruptcies and legal proceedings, assets not normally considered by historians of science. The
activities of lawyers in manufacturing science had varying degrees of success as they evolved over the course of a century. During the
early decades of the twentieth century, attorneys were largely successful in limiting victims' recovery for silicosis and keeping it out
of the public eye. Similarly, at first, cigarette and asbestos product manufacturers were successful in limiting litigation's effect on
the bottom line. However, a growing number of public health advocates and plaintiff attorneys brought these controversies increasingly
into the public legal arena, resulting in massive settlements by the tobacco companies and bankruptcies of many asbestos product
manufacturers. The settlements and bankruptcies also provided a treasure trove of documents, many of which detailed extensive involvement
of lawyers in the manipulation of medical research. To date, chromium and benzene manufacturers, as well as certain asbestos product
manufacturers, have been more successful in limiting damage through lawsuits and regulations. In part this is because of the newest
evolution in research tactics. During the last two decades of the twentieth century, "Litigation Support Firms" began undertaking an
increasing amount of the attorney-managed research. These companies worked hand in hand with attorneys, as they transformed the peer
reviewed medical literature on toxic substances by publishing carefully structured industry friendly research (and reviews of past
research) in peer-reviewed, but often industry controlled, journals. Even when researchers have been free to publish their findings, the
approval was often subject to final approval of a report exclusively provided to the client. Thus, the public articles rarely disclosed
any hazard. On occasion the researchers published the same data in slightly altered forms in two to four publications, thus slanting the
entire balance of the peer review literature. Attorney involvement in medical research is a fundamental problem in the production of
medical knowledge. The ability to hide and manipulate science has delayed recognition of hazards such as silica, tobacco, asbestos,
chromium, and benzene by decades. Today, it continues to skew the understanding of toxic substance diseases. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the Doctor of
Philosophy. / Spring Semester 2016. / March 21, 2016. / asbestos, attorney, benzene, chromium, silica, tobacco / Includes bibliographical references. / Ronald E. Doel, Professor Directing Dissertation; Sherwood W. Wise, Jr., University
Representative; James P. Jones, Committee Member; Michael Creswell, Committee Member; Kristine Harper, Committee Member.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_360497 |
| Contributors | Biegel, Craig Alex (authoraut), Doel, Ronald Edmund (professor directing dissertation), Wise, Sherwood W. (university representative), Jones, James Pickett (committee member), Creswell, Michael (committee member), Harper, Kristine (committee member), Florida State University (degree granting institution), College of Arts and Sciences (degree granting college), Department of History (degree granting department) |
| Publisher | Florida State University, Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Language | English, English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, text |
| Format | 1 online resource (766 pages), computer, application/pdf |
| Rights | This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). The copyright in theses and dissertations completed at Florida State University is held by the students who author them. |
Page generated in 0.0077 seconds