Re: More radiation "victims"

[Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>]

	This is the case of Gene Saenger. In the study they did not give
any radiation exposure to the patients (they were receiving radiation
anyhow under other auspices). The only effect they could possibly have
had on the patients was not asking if they were nauseous (as that may have
made them think about it), but if the patient did say he was nauseous he
would be given medicine for it. There was informed consent. I don't
understand why the settlement was proposed. 

Bernard L. Cohen
Physics Dept.
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
Tel: (412)624-9245
Fax: (412)624-9163
e-mail: blc+@pitt.edu


On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Jim Muckerheide wrote:

> Group, FYI
> 
> CINCINNATI (AP) -- A judge has rejected a proposed $4.27 million settlement in
> a lawsuit filed by
> relatives of cancer patients who were given experimental radiation treatments
> in the 1960s and 1970s.
> 
> The plan rejected Monday by U.S. District Judge Sandra Beckwith had been
> submitted by lawyers for
> the defendants: the federal government, the city, the University of Cincinnati
> and several researchers.
> 
> The lawsuit stems from treatments performed on 90 patients at General
> Hospital, now called
> University Hospital, in the 1960s and early 1970s. It was a city hospital
> before it became part of the
> University of Cincinnati Hospital in 1979. 
> 
> Researchers conducted the treatments to determine if they could halt tumor
> growth. The plaintiffs
> complained that they weren't told that the Defense Department had contributed
> $651,000 to the
> experiments to see if the treatments would provide information about how
> radiation could affect
> battlefield troops. 
> 
> Plaintiffs say the treatments caused pain and hastened the death of their
> relatives. 
> 
> Defendants say the treatments were beneficial in some cases, and that any
> effect they had on death
> could not be determined because the patients were in advanced stages of
> cancer. 
> 
> The proposed settlement would pay each family $36,000 to $66,000, require
> placement of a
> memorial plaque on the university's campus, and require the federal government
> to apologize. 
> 
> Beckwith's objections included a question about whether it might be a problem
> to lump all the
> patients together as one class since evidence shows they received varying
> doses of radiation. The issue of whether to make it a class-action case also
> is under appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of
> Appeals. 
> 
> There was no comment from either side; lawyers did not return telephone calls. 
> 
> =====
> Regards, Jim Muckerheide
> jmuckerheide@delphi.com
>