| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
From the Department of Neurology (B.A.R., J.S.P.), American Parkinson Disease Association Advanced Center for Parkinson Research (B.A.R., J.S.P.), Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and General Counsel (A.B.), Moser and Marsalek, P.C. (C.A.W.), Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology (J.S.P.), and Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology (J.S.P.), Program in Physical Therapy (J.S.P.), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Brad A. Racette, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave., Box 8111, St. Louis, MO 63110; e-mail: racetteb{at}neuro.wustl.edu
Environmental factors likely contribute to the etiology of many progressive neurologic diseases. Such factors include putative neurotoxins that are often byproducts of commercial industries, potentially exposing corporations to liabilities when their products or activities are linked to the development of disease. Any hint of scientific data that support such a cause and effect relationship often encourages plaintiffs' attorneys to file suits against corporations alleging harm to their clients forcing corporations and employers to defend themselves. Both plaintiff and defendant teams hire expert witnesses who are frequently active investigators in relevant fields to bolster their positions. These legal proceedings can influence investigators and hamper research. Interactions with researchers can lead to personal financial or career gain that may bias research findings or impugn other investigators. Even researchers who have not been retained by either side of a legal dispute may be forced to respond to subpoenas for research data causing a substantial loss of research time for investigators and financial burdens on universities. Courts may require release of research records containing personal health information that could sully the trust research participants have in investigators. Litigation and its peripheral effects may bias investigators, impede research efforts, and harm research participants, thereby undermining efforts to understand the cause of neurologic disease.
Editorial, see page 2113
Supported by NIH grants K23NS43351, NS41509, NS52680, the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation (Elliot Stein Family), the Greater St. Louis Chapter of the American PD Association (APDA), and the APDA.
Disclosure: After the publication of the abstract to a 2001 manuscript on welding, Dr. Racette provided consultation and received personal compensation for one meeting each with counsel representing defendants and plaintiffs for welding-related medical matters not pertaining to any multi-district litigation, for consulting compensation totaling $2,000. Dr. Racette received $229,631 paid to Washington University in St. Louis from the Welder Health Fund into an account controlled by Dr. Racette. The Welder Health Fund was created by Gulf States Trial Attorneys to support medical screening of welders for Parkinson disease.
Received October 21, 2005. Accepted in final form July 28, 2006.
Related articles in Neurology:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  N. A. Schachtman, B. A. Racette, A. Bradley, C. A. Wrisberg, and J. S. Perlmutter THE IMPACT OF LITIGATION ON NEUROLOGIC RESEARCH Neurology, July 31, 2007; 69(5): 495 - 496. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. J. Weiner and A. Rajput Conflicts of interest in expert witnesses: Is there a solution? Neurology, December 26, 2006; 67(12): 2113 - 2114. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
Read all Correspondence
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
