Toxic Chemicals

Published on: January 18, 2016

Harvard Study Suggests E-Cigarettes Contain Harmful Chemical Diacetyl

E-cigarettes, or vapor cigarettes, have become an incredibly popular alternative to traditional tobacco products, with over 250 different companies currently selling the devices. Many tout the electronic apparatuses as a better alternative to using traditional tobacco products because they produce less odor, cost less than traditional tobacco products, and are less dangerous when it comes to creating fire hazards.

Despite these alleged benefits, some researchers have dug into whether the new alternative provides fewer health risks than using traditional tobacco products. Last month, Harvard University researchers produced results from a study in which they examined a few different types of flavored electronic cigarette products. The study involved testing over 50 varieties of flavored products and liquids marketed by the most common brands. The tests looked for a variety of chemicals, including diacetyl, acetoin, and two varieties of pentanedione.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 23, 2015

Vermont Toxic Substances in Children’s Products Reporting Rule Takes Effect

By Moll Law Group

Earlier this month, Vermont’s Toxic Substances in Children’s Products Rule took effect. According to this rule, companies that sell children’s products in Vermont must make certain disclosures about whether the products contain any of the 66 chemicals specified in the legislation if the chemical is present as a contaminant (100 ppm or more), or if the chemical was intentionally added beyond the chemical’s practical quantification limit (PQL).

Some of the chemicals included on the list are formaldehyde, methylene chloride, styrene, and a number of parabens. A manufacturer’s report must include the name of the chemical, a description of the chemical, the amount contained in each product unit, the name and address of the product’s manufacturer, the reason the chemical was included in the product, and the brand name and product model.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 12, 2015

Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal Revisits Rules on Scientific Evidence

By Moll Law Group

In mass tort cases, one of the toughest elements for plaintiffs to prove is that the product’s harmful nature caused the plaintiffs’ injuries. This is especially true in cases involving exposure to harmful chemicals. In our modern environment, there are a host of chemicals that we encounter on a daily basis, whether we know it or not. Determining whether a chemical is harmful and whether that chemical was the cause of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries can be a challenge.

The recent case of C.W. ex rel. Wood v. Textron, Inc. touched on this subject and provided the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal with an opportunity to review the types of scientific evidence that parties may offer in relation to proving both specific and general causation in a mass tort case.

Continue reading →