corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13130

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Editorial .
Need to Know
New York Times 2008 Mar 12
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/opinion/12wed3.html


Full text:

When companies are sued for selling unsafe consumer products or creating environmental hazards, the cases too often end with court orders that keep vital health and safety dangers secret. This practice works out well for the wrongdoers, but it is bad for ordinary Americans, who need to know about these threats.

The Senate Judiciary Committee last week approved a modest but potentially life-saving bill that would require federal judges to consider public health and safety before granting a protective order, sealing court records or approving a settlement agreement.

The need for this bill is especially great right now when federal agencies charged with protecting Americans lack the resources and the will to exercise strong oversight.

Under the bipartisan bill – the Sunshine in Litigation Act – judges will still have discretion about whether to grant a request for secrecy. First they will have to apply a sensible balancing test that takes into account both the public’s interest in learning of a potential hazard and the defendant’s legitimate interests in secrecy, say to protect trade secrets.

The bill, sponsored by Senators Herb Kohl of Wisconsin and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, both Democrats, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, is similar to laws already on the books in several states.

Business interests opposed to the bill argue that it would discourage settlements, clog the courts with more trials and hurt plaintiffs by requiring lengthy fights over production of documents. Yet there has been no legal meltdown in jurisdictions that now have similar rules.

Senator Kohl first proposed the measure 15 years ago. Since then, there have been many cases involving prescription drugs, heart valves, defective tires and other products in which an untold number of injuries and deaths could have been prevented had the public not been blocked from learning about the dangers.

The Senate should move quickly to approve this much-needed bill. And the House should move quickly to introduce the same legislation. When the courts have information about serious threats to health and safety, the public has a clear right and need to know.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909