Endocrine-Modulating Chemicals as a Case Study of Science in the Courtroom

Abstract

In contemporary society, many scientific issues involving toxi-cologists, epidemiologists, and other risk assessment professionals have become the topics of hotly contested legal actions. Nowhere is this more apparent than in toxic tort cases where judgements involving millions of dollars can hinge on the expert testimony provided by a toxicologist. Many of these cases involve scientific opinions that have not yet entered the mainstream of scientific thought, thus it becomes necessary for courts to place a great deal of emphasis on the reliability of science. In this paper, we analyze the scientific and legal bases of disease causation in the toxic tort context and illustrate how the emerging issue of endocrine modulation may evolve in this context. We conclude that there is an inadequate scientific basis to show personal injuries associated with exposure to a class of putative endocrine modulators. This paper is not intended to illustrate a specific case; it is intended to be a heuristic for toxicologists, risk assessors, and attorneys, who may be forced to confront these and similar issues in the course of their professional careers.