Database

The judgment may be found here. The Court has decided that symptomless sensitisation is an injury. But there may have been some error. Background IgE sensitisation to platinum salts was detected by a routine skin prick test in five employees. Occupational exposure was the probable cause. The employer admitted breach of statutory H&S duty. Sensitisation is a necessary precursor to allergic reaction, but a person may remain free of symptoms for years and may never have an allergic reaction. What the Court seems not to have been advised though is that in a high proportion, sensitisation becomes undetectable if further contact with the allergen is avoided or remains below a certain level. There were no symptoms despite working in the same environment which had caused this biological change. It is implausible that all five became sensitised only moments before the test. More likley they were sensitised at some point between tests and had continued to be exposed to platinum salts until t

Liability ENID modelling has recently been added to our standard Radar service. (ENID = Event not in Data). What it is. For a given ENID scenario, the new modelling creates an annual liability loss distribution curve for a given jurisdiction e.g. UK.  It then apportions the mean loss across industry codes. Where relevant, the time development of that loss is also estimated from latency periods and from likely dates of knowledge. The time-is-money value of reserving for the loss can then be estimated and the potential opportunity cost of delayed reserving can be calculated. Given that emerging risks arise from science studies it should be no surprise that the same studies can be analysed to give estimates of attributable frequency of loss. Other work is then used to assess how many of these attributable losses could make a reasonable liability claim. For example, if half the attributable cases could prove a breach of duty then the attributable frequency is at most, half the attributable

Many people are still uncertain about the meaning and insurance implications of antibiotic resistance. For liability insurance the problem is one of quantum inflation and increased probability of claim. Antibiotic resistance directly means that the severity of problematic food poisoning and broken skin injuries increases, leading to quantum inflation and, people with severe injuries are more likely to claim, leading to frequency inflation. Claims for antibiotic resistance per se would be rare since resistance is  a naturally occurring event. Injury severity, premature death and the higher risks involved in elective medical interventions would have effects on life insurances. If all food was properly cooked, there would be no food poisoning claims. If wounds were thoroughly cleaned and disinfected the rate of severe infection would be reduced. Liability attaches to the cause of infection, not (yet) to the cause of resistance. A new technology is needed On the whole antibiotics do not im

A new publication describes the role of risk management in commercial nanotechnology projects. Risk appetite is the unifying concept. It follows that risk transfer is an essential component when there is uncertainty. The paper identifies commonly available measurements which scale with risk, are (to a large extent) mutually orthogonal with respect to risk, are generalisable across reasonably clear hazard groupings, remain valid when combined into a risk value and can be calibrated against research findings and commercial feedback. The limited set of these will not serve the highly sophisticated precautionary regulatory purpose. Quantitative nano-specific injury risk evaluation for regulatory purposes is still a long way off. In the mean time, risk generators and liability insurers may benefit from a shared approach to nano risks. Such an approach would support the development of expertise. The paper can be read free of charge until 28th May 2017. Included is a link to a free, confident

Britain is being asked to decide whether or not to be a member of the EU. Dire warnings and visions of heaven for either option are now common fare in conversations and media formats. Warnings and visions are usually vaguely attached to some semi-acceptable assertion, a half-explained mechanism of action, a snippet from some potentially relevant historical setting or an appeal to what some would see as self-interest. Career politicians are having a wonderful time of it. The key factors in judging the prospects of any institution all relate to the optimum development and use of resources. For this, we need facts and we need mechanisms of action that have predictive value within the range of foreseeable future facts. The list of resources is very lengthy. It includes: communication, the value of tradeable assets, ideas, education, transport, health, security, regulation, essential infrastructure, trade mechanisms, justice, political system… Mechanisms are essentially either; accide

Is there an exposure to asbestos which does not “legally cause” mesothelioma? Evidence from: C Gilham et al. Occup Environ Med (2015);0:1–10. doi:10.1136/oemed-2015-103074 Gilham et al, compared asbestos fibre burdens from the lungs of mesothelioma and lung cancer cases and from these, developed risk equations. 79% of the fibres they observed were amosite; the subjects were all resident in the UK. Fibre burden and diagnosis were objective and precise; which means the main uncertainties were in unintentional bias and biological variability, about which not much more could be done except by sub categorisation by genetic and epigenetic profile (which would require a much bigger study). Using mathematical methods adapted from the design of optical telescopes and electronic circuits, we have extended the reported analysis to make an original estimate of de minimis. Compared with background, and for asbestos fibres which are longer than 5 micrometres, the smallest detectable increase in the