A federal district court judge in Oregon has barred junk science testimony in breast implant litigation. This affects 70 women who sued breast implant manufacturers.
Judge Robert E. Jones ruled evidence supporting a link between breast implants and "systemic" illness does not meet the threshold of scientific proof necessary to merit being presented to juries.
Although the cases will proceed, no testimony will be allowed on systemic illnesses such as rheumatoid arthritis and scleroderma. Testimony will be limited to localized complications such as rupture, breast hardening and pain.
Judge Jones stated
I am mindful that this opinion goes farther in evaluating and in eliminating plaintiffs' claims than any other opinion in breast implant litigation pending in this country...litigation over the ability of silicone gel breast implants to cause disease in women has been chaotic in its results.
Judge Jones' opinion is an attempt to apply the principles for evaluating scientific testimony set forth in the 1993 Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrell Dow. Daubert requires judges to serve as gatekeepers to keep out unscientific and speculative testimony in favor of "pertinent evidence based on scientifically valid principles.
Three cheers for Judge Robert E. Jones. A hero in the war against junk science.