logo
Call us: +44 (0)1865 244727

  • Home
  • Scope
  • News
  • Products
    • RADAR
    • CALL-OFF PROJECTS
  • Clients
  • Contact
  • How we work
    • Independent
      • Common law orthodoxies
      • Sensationalism
      • Expert witness
      • Regulation and Politics
      • Tied services
    • Up-to-date
      • Timely
      • Insurance Scenarios
      • Probabilistic Methods
    • Expert
      • Personal Injury
      • Trends
    • Innovative
  • Database
    • Member’s login
    • Member’s Settings
    • Register
    • RADAR Database
  • Recent projects
    • EMFs
    • STRESS AT WORK
    • WHIPLASH
    • WELDING RODS: MANGANESE EXPOSURE
    • ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
    • Other Projects



2011. Smoking – material contribution problem.

Jul 05, 2012
by Andrew@Reliabilityoxford.co.uk
0 Comment
Smoking as a contributor to the cause of occupational lung cancer has been taken to court, but the situation is unclear. The detailed mechanisms now being worked on will allow greater certainty in the future, but not yet. In the alternate, inflammation could be used as a catch-all mechanism. Any cause or contributor to inflammation could be cited as a contributory cause. Cancer is indivisible, BUT, details of the mechanism could provide defences based on timing of exposure, and de minimis.

Smoking causes cardiovascular disease. Occupational or product contributions to this would be possible. Indivisible and divisible outcomes are both possible. Likely claims involving smoking would be when fine dust exposure is alleged to be a cause of indivisible heart disease. More speculative would occupational causes of debilitating high blood pressure or angina; both of which are divisible.

Evidence from:

A report of the Surgeon General (2010) ISBN 978-0-16-084078-4
How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease

Different mechanisms would fall under different legal precedents. The list includes Bonnington, McGhee, Wilsher, Badger, Bailey, Barker, Gregg v Scott, Fairchild, Hotson, Holtby, Sienkiewicz, XYZ, Novartis and the recent EL triggers case. For example, exposure to multiple mutagens would be under Wilsher if they each operated independently and under McGhee if they somehow co-operated. Chronic inflammation would be added to by any and all irritants, Bailey might be cited if the outcome is indivisible, Holtby if it is divisible.

11#1 3

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

*
*

captcha *

Search Documents


Categories

  • Causation
    • de minimis
    • material contribution
  • Date of knowledge
  • Diagnosis
  • Duty of Care
  • Exposure estimation data
  • Mitigation
  • Motor related injury
  • News
  • Uncategorized

Archives

  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • November 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • November 2017
  • July 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • November 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • July 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012

© Re: Liability (Oxford) Ltd. 2012. All rights reserved.
Website Design by The Big Picture