Hazardous Snacks
Doctor links microwave popcorn to consumer's lung disease.
October 31, 2007 at 08:00 PM
6 minute read
Wayne Watson loved extra-buttery microwave popcorn. In fact you might say the 53-year-old furniture salesman was a popcorn addict. For more than 10 years he microwaved two or three packages a day at work and in his Colorado home, often breaking open the bags to inhale the fragrance before diving in.
When Watson developed symptoms of a lung condition, the first doctor he consulted was puzzled. Watson didn't smoke and had not been exposed to excessive amounts of mold or bird droppings–all of which can cause lung inflammation.
In February, as Watson's cough and shortness of breath worsened, he sought help from Dr. Cecile Rose, acting head of the division of environmental and occupational health sciences at the National Jewish Medical and Research Center in Denver. Rose, who studied lung illnesses in factory workers as a consultant to flavoring and popcorn manufacturers, noticed a similarity between Watson's symptoms and those of the workers. When Watson acknowledged his popcorn-eating habit and tests revealed lung airway damage, she diagnosed him with bronchiolitis obliterans, also known as “popcorn lung.”
Rose sent a letter in July to the FDA, EPA, OSHA and CDC warning of a potential consumer health risk from inhaling the fumes of butter-flavored microwave popcorn. Rose's letter, which came to light Sept. 4 when it was posted on a public health policy blog, is just the litigation lever for which the plaintiffs' bar had been waiting.
Although manufacturers have paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to lung-damaged popcorn plant workers, no one had found a link to consumers until Watson's case surfaced. Now Humphrey, Farrington & McClain, a Missouri-based plaintiffs' firm that represented many of the popcorn and flavoring plant workers, plans to file on Watson's behalf in Colorado what is expected to be the first consumer popcorn lung litigation.
“This is a situation where the plaintiffs' attorneys have been waiting for the science to catch up with their theory,” says Richard Fama, a member in Cozen O'Connor who has represented manufacturers in workers' popcorn lung lawsuits. “Now the evidence seems to be mounting that will support their theory.”
Making the Connection
The most recent evidence includes publication in May of a study linking bronchiolitis obliterans to occupational exposure to diacetyl, a widely used flavoring ingredient that gives microwave popcorn its buttery taste. Although no causative process has been established, the theory is that heated diacetyl creates a vapor that, when inhaled repeatedly over an extended period, causes scarring of the lungs, restricting the ability to exhale.
Evidence of a connection has been mounting ever since a November 2000 National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH) survey at the Gilster-MaryLee popcorn plant in Jasper, Mo., discovered plant employees had 3.3 times the rate of pulmonary obstruction compared with the general public, generating a rash of lawsuits.
More than 500 worker suits against popcorn and flavorings manufacturers nationwide are pending, says Kenneth McClain, a partner at Humphrey, Farrington & McClain. His firm has handled four suits resulting in verdicts ranging from $2.7 million to $20 million. Another 120 cases settled for undisclosed amounts.
Fama says one manufacturer alone paid more than $50 million in settlements. Total verdicts and settlements are in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
“We have workers that work in the flavoring companies [where the butter flavorings are manufactured], we have candy workers who are sick because anything with butter flavoring attached to it contains diacetyl, including butterscotch. Even root beer has diacetyl in it,” McClain says. “We also have cases for people living around plants where diacetyl is used.”
Gearing Up
Now McClain is preparing for consumer litigation. He says that within a few weeks of the media reports about Watson, he received inquiries from around the country from consumers diagnosed with bronchiolitis obliterans.
The consumer lawsuits will be similar to those previously filed on behalf of popcorn and flavoring plant workers, he says. “The injury is the same, the chemical is the same–it's just a different kind of exposure.”
Potential damages from consumers alleging popcorn lung are extremely high because bronchiolitis obliterans can be life-threatening and has no cure. But the relatively small number of people who suffer from the disease will limit the overall impact of the litigation, product liability experts say.
“Will the publicity stimulate interest by the plaintiffs' bar? Yes. Will it mean a vast number of suits? My suspicion is no because the condition that people have associated with diacetyl is extraordinarily rare,” says Vince Walkowiak, co-head of the product liability practice at Fulbright & Jaworski. “Even in manufacturing facilities where there have been studies, the incidence is less than 5 percent of the worker population.”
Walkowiak also points out that few people share Watson's compulsion for eating microwave popcorn and breathing the fumes. “I know a lot of people who love microwave popcorn, but they don't eat two or three bags a day,” he says.
Proactive Move
Nonetheless, the worker-safety issues alone are prompting government investigations in addition to the ongoing NIOSH studies. OSHA announced in April that it's initiating a National Emphasis Program to address the hazards of diacetyl for popcorn factory workers. The FDA, which currently gives diacetyl a “Generally Regarded as Safe” status, is investigating the effects of the chemical, as is the EPA. A bill to ban diacetyl in the workplace by 2010 is moving through the California legislature. In addition, the House passed Sept. 26 a bill to begin federal regulation of worker exposure to diacetyl.
Popcorn manufacturers aren't waiting to see the extent of the regulatory action or consumer litigation, however. A few days before the media reported on Dr. Rose's letter, Weaver Popcorn Co. announced it already had begun shipping new butter-flavored microwave popcorn that contains no diacetyl. Other microwave popcorn manufacturers, including American Pop Corn Co., ConAgra and General Mills, said they also plan to remove diacetyl from their products.
“These manufacturers acted proactively to maintain the reputation that they make a safe, quality product and respond immediately to any suggestion that the product represents a risk to consumers,” Walkowiak says. “This could be a nice template for how to respond.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250