Posted on 01/24/2006 6:29:20 PM PST by qam1
Abstract
This discussion examines the use of litigation as a strategy to protect the public health. The history of tobacco litigation provides a model to evaluate potential litigation strategies against other industries that pose a threat to public health, particularly the food industry. This paper demonstrates that although legislation would be a preferable solution, lessons from the tobacco wars suggest that effective national legislation is unlikely at the present time. Based on the differences and similarities between the tobacco and food industries, it predicts the effectiveness of particular kinds of obesity litigation and the food industry’s likely response.
The tobacco industry has vigorously fought individual injury lawsuits and has had remarkable success in resisting such cases. The food industry is likely to successfully employ a similar “scorched earth” litigation strategy in individual injury cases. However, the tobacco industry did agree to the Master Settlement Agreement in the lawsuits brought by the state attorneys general because they were a unique kind of litigation with a finite number of plaintiffs. Likewise, state lawsuits under consumer protection acts may be a distinct type of litigation that permits cases to focus on deceptive advertisements while avoiding complicated causation issues. Such lawsuits have the potential to be a useful tool to fight obesity and enlist the efforts of the food industry in resisting the epidemic. Understanding the lessons of tobacco can save public health advocates much time and many resources and thus allow tobacco litigation to benefit public health in new ways.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedirect.com ...
Link contains chapters on
A Brief History of Tobacco Litigation
Food Companies’ Contribution to the Obesity Epidemic
Regulatory or Legislative Approaches
Obesity Litigation
Consumer Protection Statutes
Predicting the Response of the Food Industry to Lawsuits
Strategies for Food Litigation
wonder who he'd sue about AIDS.
This has been coming for a long time. It will be a tough nut to crack, though. Food is not addictive in the way that tobacco is. There are a universe of options out there for anyone who want to eat healthy. I'm just surprised the lawyers haven't gone after the Alcohol makers. Probably 'cause too many of them drink.
A but, but, but, but they promised they were going to stop at smokers Ping
What a joke
Tobacco litigation was never about "protecting" the health of the public but a get rich scheme of a handful of trial lawyers with a tickled down effect to the states who jumped on the money train
If tobacco was public enemy number 1, as asserted in the legal briefs
then why is it still being sold?!
They have the deep pockets like the tobacco industry
That's because Anheuser-Busch is a very powerful and highly politically-connected company, most likely with the Democrats. The Democrats do not want to anger the powerful Missouri faction.
Liberals really HATE liberty.
Thanks for the ping!
Daynard's name in the author line is all I needed to see.
This is propaganda.
If tobacco was so evil, why are so many people alive after all the decades when that killer was rampant?
It will never happen. People would hunt these fascists down and stone them in the streets if they messed with the nation's favorite drug. I agree with you, though, alcohol makes tobacco and fatty foods look like vitamins and health food in comparison to total social, economic, legal and health care considerations.
You, Sir, have obviously never been to Sonny's BBQ.
Thanks for the ping!
This one? hehe Oh! SONNY'S! This one is BUDDY'S!
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.