ATTORNEYS  |  LAW STUDENTS  |  PUBLICchat center
Counsel.Net - ATTORNEYS - Attorneys Lawyers Attorney Law And Legal Professionals
Attorneys lawyers law firms
Latest Posts Full Chatboard Submit Post



Toxlaw.com Nav
Toxic Tort Forum
ToxBoard (Gn)
Attorneys
Law Students
Practice Areas
Legal Jobs
Classified Ads
MCLE/CLE
Legal Questions

Report this post


Re: Shoemaker & Cholestryramine Therapy for Mold Illness
Posted by Mike B. on 1/19/09

    On 1/18/09, ErikMoldWarrior wrote:
    > I concur with Cat Budak's statments.
    >
    > The concept of "CFS" has been grossly abused and misused by many opportunists since the syndrome was created.
    > Dr Shoemaker disregarded all the static and confusion, and went straight to the soucrce, to find out exactly what "CFS" was
    > created to describe.
    > And that is why Dr Shoemaker is more effective and has a greater understanding of the illness which was named "CFS" than any
    > other doctor in the world.
    >
    > -ErikMoldWarrior
    > Prototype for CFS
    >

    Some recent findings by a federal court that ripped Shoemaker a new one:

    Because he was unable to complete any part of his REP, Dr. Shoemaker claims that merely by diagnosing plaintiffs with “mold
    illness,” he has established evidence of causation. He asserts that because the research model for his case definition was proven
    in his most recently-published study, causation is established. And “once established, causation does not have to be re-invented
    for each repeat case.” (Pls.' Ex. 14 ¶ 109.) This assertion is entirely without merit. In actuality, the results from his third
    paper merely support “the general hypothesis that SBS [Sick-Building Syndrome] is associated with exposure to WDBs [water-damaged
    buildings].” Shoemaker, Sick Building Syndrome and Exposure to Water Damaged Buildings, supra, at 583. In other words, Dr.
    Shoemaker himself reports that it confirms a “ general hypothesis” (one that finds no support outside of Dr. Shoemaker's research
    group), not proof of specific causation for every future patient. Indeed, as *141 pointed out by defendants' expert immunologist,
    Dr. Shoemaker's assertion that he need not determine causation for future patients is contrary to accepted medical principles.
    (Defs.' Ex. 19 ¶ 30 (“for each new case, one must evaluate each patient on a case-by-case basis ... to determine the most likely
    diagnosis and ultimately causes for that disease process”).)


    Given that Dr. Shoemaker arrives at his opinions as to both general and specific causation based on novel and unaccepted theories
    and methodologies, plaintiffs cannot sustain their burden under Daubert as to causation.


    V. NATURE AND EXTENT OF PLAINTIFFS' INJURIES

    Because the Court finds “mold illness” to be an unaccepted diagnosis, any testimony as to the nature or extent of plaintiffs'
    injuries relating to that illness is necessarily unsupported by reliable scientific evidence. Dr. Shoemaker himself admits that
    without any knowledge of how each plaintiff would respond to treatment, he cannot offer an opinion as to the permanency of their
    symptoms. (Defs.' Ex. 9 at 36:11-19 (“I can't give permanency in this case, because she hasn't even taken the first intervention
    that can correct this illness.”).) And similarly, he cannot say which of plaintiffs' symptoms were caused by exposure to the damp
    environment of the apartment. (Tr. at 193:24-194:5.) Therefore, based on Dr. Shoemaker's own admissions, his testimony in these
    areas would be nothing other than speculation.

    CONCLUSION


    For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to exclude the opinion testimony of plaintiffs' expert, Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker, is
    GRANTED.


     
You are on the mcs CHATBOARD:   LATEST POSTS   ALL POSTS   SUBMIT POST


Sponsored Links  

Free Legal Classifieds: Buy and sell anything law-related - never a cost to post or browse
counsel.net/classifieds

Legal Jobs: Attorneys and legal professionals - find your perfect legal job from Counsel.Net
counsel.net/jobs

Attorney Directory: Find a lawyer or chat with an attorney - Free!
counsel.net

New Moms Wanted!
Join the community for new and expecting moms. Check out Maternityville.com Maternity Chat!
Other Chatboards in this Category...
Toxic Torts Chatboards
ToxBoard (Gen)
Asbestos
Black Mold
Building Materials
Class Actions
 Fen-Phen
EPA/CDC/NIH
Food Additives
Legal Experts
Medical Implants
 Fiberglass
Government Claims
Gulf War Syndrome
MCS/MCSS
Pharmaceuticals
 Herbal Supplements
Tobacco Claims
Workplace Exposures

 
      Google
       
      Web Toxlaw.com

  Site Map: Home Search Contacts Chatboards Mailrings Jobs Legal Tools Advertise
  © 1996 - 2007. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.