Recently, the manufacturer of the ASR hip, DePuy Orthopaedics, and it’s parent company Johnson & Johnson, Inc., sought to dismiss one of the earliest filed cases involving a plaintiff who is not a resident of California. The defendants argued that the case (Darling v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.) should be dismissed and prosecuted in Connecticut, the state in which Mr. Darling lives. While the defendants argued that this would serve the convenience of the parties, the fact is that dismissal of the case would have caused delay, forcing the Plaintiff to wait much longer for his day in court. On May 14, Judge Richard Kramer denied defendants’ motion, and agreed with PSB’s argument that it is appropriate for ASR cases to be prosecuted in California’s state courts. This was a significant victory for patients all over the country who received ASR hips and suffered injury as a result.

If you have questions about the DePuy ASR hip litigation, or any case involving a metal-on-metal hip implant, please contact Peter Polos or Pete Kaufman.

In an effort to determine what products are best for consumers, the organization tested a total of 18 of the most popular sunscreens on the market.  What they found was that the Walgreens Continuous Spray Sport SPF 50 and No-Ad with Aloe & Vitamin E SPF 45 offered protection sufficient to allow them to gain a crucial “Best Buy” designation.  However, that’s not to say that other products were exactly slouches.  Seven items held up very well against UVA rays, met Food and Drug Administration mandated broad spectrum label specifications, and after 80 minutes of water immersion were classified as excellent against UVB rays.

Two items did not meet the requirements of a wavelength test.  These items were the Banana Boat Kids Tear-Free Sting-Free SPF 50+ and the Alba Botanica Natural Very Emollient Sunblock Sport SPF 45.

Consumer Reports also goes further, offering tips to ensure you’re getting the most bang for your buck.  They recommend that sunscreens should resist water and have an SPF of 30 or higher.  They also say that a person ought to use two or three tablespoons of sunscreen, and that spray products should not be used on children until after the FDA has had the chance to investigate risks associated with inhaling such a product.

The President signed the Food Safety Modernization Act into law in January of last year, but it has yet to be put into place.  Some people think that the reason could be political, since we’re in the midst of an election year.  Estimates have pegged the new law as costing about $1.4 billion between now and 2015.  The FDA’s deputy commissioner for foods has stated, though, that the process is in the late stages and the new rules will be released shortly.

What exactly are these new rules that are taking so much time to craft?  First, the FDA hopes to deal more with preventing food adulteration before items can be released into the market rather than simply responding to safety threats that already exist.  In addition, the FDA hopes to gain more field inspectors, and these persons would be responsible for examining imports, greens, and other items that tend to be at greater risk of contamination.

The new rules would provide a basis for further regulation.  If reports are to be believed, an unnamed official with the FDA is urging regulators to release the rules quickly.  This new urgency was allegedly prompted by worries that the White House Office of Management and Budget slowed down the new rules following a review of the new law.

In Louisiana yesterday, for instance, an effort to ban all handheld cell phones didn’t even get past a small Senate committee.  House Bill 695 was rejected 2 to 1 by a small four person quorum (one person abstained) made up of persons from the Committee on Transportation, Highways, and Public Works.  Numerous other senators didn’t even show up for the vote, and the bill is unlikely to see the light of day for the remainder of this session.

The supporter of the bill, which would have banned all handheld cellphones but allowed speakerphones and earpiece-connected devices, said that Louisiana was behind the times and that a ban likely wouldn’t be passed until after a disaster occurred.

One of the senators that voted against the bill said that all studies they’ve seen that attempted to show a correlation between cell phone bans and improvements in traffic safety were inconclusive.  An individual with the Louisiana Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated something similar, claiming the NHTSA said it hasn’t been proven that talking on a cellphone leads to a greater number of crashes.  That same individual said a larger danger exists from other distractions such as eating while driving or messing with the radio.

Today, the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Park Service, and the National Council on Skin Cancer Prevention have joined forces to provide tips on how consumers can ward off the types of threats that could cause skin cancer, the most common cancer in the entire country.  To that end, the latter organization is calling the Friday before Memorial Day as “Don’t Fry Day.”

The FDA recommends using sunscreens with an SPF higher than 15 which offer broad spectrum protection, which means protection from both UVA and UVB rays.  The National Parks Service, for their part, says that everyone should not only apply sunscreen, but also put on a hat and drink water should they head out to one of the picturesque parks around the country.

The EPA, through their SunWise program, suggests that consumers download an app which provides information on the day’s ultraviolet index.  They also say that every two hours should see the administration of a palmful of sunscreen.  They also suggest staying in the shade from 10 in the morning to 4 in the afternoon, as damage from solar rays tends to be greater during this time.

To that end, the organization has announced June 19 as the date of a Washington D.C. meeting called International Capacity Building with Respect to Food Safety.  Persons involved in the daylong meeting will be able to offer their comments and opinions on how this portion of the Food Safety Modernization Act.  The FDA is hoping that the forum can be used to get ideas on how to improve regulatory, scientific, and technical policy so as to make products safer in those countries that export food to the United States.

Right now, the plan calls for six different elements that must all be addressed in some capacity, hence the need for the meeting.  First, it must be decided what sorts of agreements and stipulations must be made between nations to ensure that food safety standards are met.  Then, there must be a way for countries to safely share computer data.  Inspection reports must be recognized on both sides, and government officials and food producers must be trained on food production and handling procedures.

In addition, countries will have to accept cross-border testing techniques so as to ensure what passes muster in one country would do so in another.  Requirements will also need to be standard under what is known as the Codex Alimentarius.

The reason for the recall is a defective rear axle.  The vehicles registered in Puerto Rico are in danger of suffering increased stress brought about by excessive torsional loading.  This manufacturing defect may cause the axle to crack, thus potentially forcing the user to undergo a loss of control and a subsequent accident.

Starting Monday, Ford will inform owners of the at-risk vehicles of the issue, and those persons may contact dealers to get an inspection.  Consumers will be able to receive a repair of the axles that consists of the placement of a bracket meant to reinforce that component, or else they will be able to have the dealer replace the axle completely.  Either way, this should come free of cost to the consumer. Owners may also contact Ford directly at their customer service center for any clarification they might be seeking about the recall.