Mesothelioma Case

October 3, 2015

Results not Promising for New Mesothelioma Drug

As many know too well, there is not much doctors can do for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. This is not say there aren’t a multitude of FDA-approved treatment options, because there are, but even in the best case scenarios, patients undergo invasive and painful procedures and may only be given an extra few months to live.

There is, however, hope that, one day, there will be real treatment options for mesothelioma patients that can actually arrest the growth of tumors or even force them into remission. One drug that people thought might help doctors and patients achieve these goals was known as VS-6063, being developed by Verestem Inc. pharmaceuticals based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The company had recruited patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma in 2011, and, by 2012, the company had announced it was closing enrollment in the study because it had enough patients with the deadly disease to complete the study. Continue reading

September 9, 2015

One Man’s Struggle with Mesothelioma

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

A diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma is devastating.

A person begins to experience chest pain, abdominal pain, or shortness of breath and goes to the doctor to see what is wrong. He or she is told they have malignant pleural mesothelioma, and even though patient only just learned of having this illness, he or she is also told most patients do not live long after being diagnosed. The vast majority of cases prove lethal in as few as three years, with many of those victims not surviving a full year after learning they are sick.

Patients are also told there are treatment options, but they involve high doses of chemotherapy, radiation, major surgery, or a combination of all of these treatments, and, even in the best cases, generally only extend a patient’s life for a relatively short period of time. Continue reading

August 25, 2015

New Research on New Mesothelioma Treatments

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

There are several treatment options available for patients who are diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma. The problem with all of these treatment options is they generally do not work very well. Mostly, they are able to sustain a patient’s life for a matter of months, so the victim has longer to spend with his or her family. However, those few extra months, even in the best-case scenarios, come at very high cost.

Treatment options typically involve large doses of potent chemotherapy and radiation, and may involve invasive surgery where entire organs and large sections of tissue are removed. Once the organ tissue is removed, more chemotherapy or radiation is administered internally to the site of the tumor. Even if these procedures are successful, most patients will still die shortly after the procedure and will be in a great deal of pain during that time. Continue reading

June 17, 2015

Asbestos Illness Beyond Mesothelioma

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

When we think of asbestos and asbestos-related illness, we primarily think of mesothelioma and asbestosis. However, asbestos exposure has been linked to other forms of cancer and respiratory illness besides mesothelioma. Many of these medical conditions are often deadly too.

According to a recent article from Outbreak News Today, asbestos exposure can also cause victims to develop lung cancer, bowel cancer, ovarian cancer and laryngeal cancer. While lung cancer is typically linked to smoking, credible research has proven long-term exposure to asbestos has been demonstrated to cause lung cancer. What may be more surprising is that, worldwide, more cases of lung cancer resulting in fatalities are linked to asbestos exposure than cigarette smoking.
Continue reading

June 11, 2015

Mesothelioma Lawsuits over Asbestos-Free Products

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent news article from the Legal Intelligencer, while companies are not strictly (automatically) liable for mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illness caused by products they did not manufacture, they may still be liable under a traditional negligence cause of action with proof of duty, breach, and causation being required.

This is according to a recent ruling by a federal judge in Pennsylvania. While this is not United States Supreme Court precedence, many industry experts believe it may be foreshadowing a similar ruling from the high court. In Tincher v. Omega Fox, the case over which the federal judge presided, plaintiff had worked as a propeller mechanic on airplane engines manufactured by defendant.

While defendant manufactured the airplane engines, many of these engines contained aftermarket insulation made by other companies and installed in the engines.
Continue reading

May 16, 2015

Asbestos in Space Flight Programs

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

When we think about all the amazing inventions and discoveries associated with NASA over the last half century, it’s impossible not to wonder what the future holds. Even though the shuttle program is over, and the only place to see a NASA-manned vehicle is a museum, engineers are hard at work designing a new rocket system designed to send astronauts to Mars.

One thing that may come as a surprise is, despite all of the cutting-edge technology, asbestos has played a major a role in spaceflight, and, to some extent, still does. As discussed in a feature from NASA Spaceflight.com, asbestos-containing material has been heavily used in various aspects of rocket design and heat shielding technology.

One the one hand, it is easy to see why asbestos was, and still is, a somewhat favored material. It is a naturally occurring element, which is easy to mine, and cheap to refine into manufactured products. It an excellent insulator from heat, caustic chemicals, electricity, and fire, and it can also be spun into extremely lightweight textiles. Weight reduction is a major goal in spaceflight, as these machines have to reach speeds of around 20,000 MPH to clear Earth’s atmosphere and get into space.
Continue reading

May 6, 2015

Houston’s Astrodome Past and Future Tied to Asbestos

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

When it was first built, the Houston Astrodome was seen as marvel of modern engineering, which would be a gateway to the future of stadium construction. It all began, according to a recent news feature in The Guardian, with a young girl asking her father why people couldn’t play baseball indoors. She was unhappy when minor league games would get rained out, because that meant she had less time to spend with her dad.

Her father found the idea interesting and spent the next several years getting funding and support for what would be eventually be named the Eighth Wonder of the World by media agencies. Construction was complete, and the Astrodome opened to the general public at the beginning of the 1965 baseball season. President Lyndon B. Johnson attended the game, along with more than 20 astronauts from NASA mission control in Houston, and they all simultaneously threw out a first pitch before the exhibition game between the Astros and the New York Yankees. Mickey Mantle hit a home run during that game.
Continue reading

February 15, 2015

Riggs v. Georgia-Pacific LLC – Heirs Allowed Wrongful Death Claim Despite Prior Injury Verdict

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

The Utah Supreme Court ruled the fact of a personal injury verdict in favor of a mesothelioma victim did not bar a victim’s heirs from pursuing wrongful death litigation against the same defendants for the same injury.

The ruling in Riggs v. Georgia-Pacific LLC was a marked victory for mesothelioma plaintiffs who wish to pursue additional action following the death of a loved one due to negligent asbestos exposure.

The high court ruled a wrongful death claim – even one arising out of the same injury and against the same defendants as a prior personal injury case – was not barred because the plain language of state statute held a wrongful death action as independent from any others. It is not foreclosed simply as a matter of law because decedent prevailed in a related personal injury action.
Continue reading

January 24, 2015

Bankrupt Asbestos Producer Sets Aside $375.5 Million for Future Mesothelioma Victims

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

For much of last century, asbestos producers reaped huge profits from making and selling a product they knew to be deadly to workers and consumers. Humans have used asbestos for thousands of years because it is cheap to mine and naturally resistant to heat, fire, caustic chemicals, and electricity. However, it was during the industrial revelation when large-scale use began in virtually every aspect of industry and construction trades.

While the general public was not told of the dangers of asbestos exposure, producers of the toxic material were very much aware of the harm their products were causing. We know this because documents obtained discovery in mesothelioma litigation revealed industry personal were aware of many of the dangers long before the general public.

One reason these companies were willing to take such risks with others’ safety is because it was also known it would take between 20 and 50 years for workers exposed to asbestos to become noticeably ill. Once a worker developed symptoms and sought treatment, they would only have a short time to live on average. These companies were willing to trade future losses for present day profits, and did not tell workers they were doing this.

By now everyone knows about dangers associated with asbestos exposure, and mesothelioma lawyers are filing lawsuits against these companies on a regular basis. The problem is many of these companies are going bankrupt as result of not being able to sell their toxic products anymore. However, there are still thousands of Americans who will be diagnosed with mesothelioma each year who need a way to financially recovery for the wrong done to them.
Continue reading

December 20, 2014

Izell v. Union Carbide Corp.: Apportionment of Damages in Mesothelioma Cases

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

According to a recent case before the California Court of Appeal, defendant purchased an asbestos mine in Coalinga, California in the early 1960s. From the time of purchase until 1985, defendant supplied asbestos to companies that used it for products to be sold to the construction industry.

Plaintiff was the owner of a construction company that built over 200 homes between the early 1960s and the mid-1980s. Plaintiff never personally worked as a builder or foreman on any of the home construction projects. He did, however, walk through the various construction sites on a regular basis. Each home was constructed with drywall that workers finished with premixed joint compound. After applying joint compound and allowing it to dry, workers then sanded it several times. Plaintiff was often present during the sanding process.
Continue reading