ASBESTOS CASE
Defendant's expert: Dr. Mary Jane Teta

Defense expert Dr. Mary Jane Teta on asbestos case:

Dr. Teta also responds to plaintiffs' arguments contending that plaintiffs' experts do not follow generally accepted methodology which requires following the accepted hierarchy of epidemiological evidence. She states that Dr. Panitz and Dr. Lemen, two of plaintiffs' experts, rely on a weight-of-evidence approach, akin to the case study approach, which is at best on the "lowest rung" of scientific evidence and compares unfavorably with epidemiological evidence.

Dr. Teta opines that plaintiffs' experts base their opinions on (1) case reports and case series, (2) increased risks of mesothelioma in asbestos exposed workers in other occupations, and (3) observations of chrysotile in human lungs and observations of asbestos exposure in garages that install and repair brakes. These would constitute a reasonable basis for forming a hypothesis related to mesothelioma and brake work, if the studies had not already been conducted and the hypothesis rejected.

Biological plausibility cannot be substituted for epidemiological evaluation according to Dr. Teta. The epidemiological evidence related to chrysotile exposure in other occupations that plaintiffs' experts rely upon is not relevant to brake work mechanics or garage workers. The fibers in brakes are shorter, resin bound, and subject to high temperatures, all of which render them less toxic than other chrysotile fibers.

Dr. Teta also rejects plaintiffs' expert Dr. Egilman's criticism of Goodman's meta analysis as selective and industry funded on the ground that neither criticism is warranted and that Dr. Egilman has developed no alternative that would show anything different.

Courtesy of New York State Lab Reporting Bureau

Click To Talk To Us Online

Frye hearing

Frye hearing inappropriate in this asbestos case
Read about Frye hearing in an asbestos case

Defendants' view of scientific methodology

Defendants’ contentions: asbestos scientific methodology
Read about defendants' view of asbestos scientific methodology

Court opinion

Court opinion in brake mechanics' mesothelioma case
Court opinion in mesothelioma case of brake mechanics

Name

Phone

strictly confidential

Your Question

First Name
Last Name
Phone Number
City and State
E-mail
When were you exposed to asbestos?
If you were exposed to asbestos at your job, state your occupation at the time of exposure
Describe how you were exposed to asbestos

ASBESTOS CASEDefendant's expert: Dr. Mary Jane Teta

ASBESTOS CASE
Defendant's expert: Dr. Mary Jane Teta