Roanoke Personal Injury Lawyer

CPSC Approves New Testing Requirements for Phthalates

Chrissie Cole — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:48:00 GMT

New third party testing requirements for phthalates has been unanimously approved by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The testing aims to ensure that children’s toys and child care articles meet federal limits.

Phthalates are a type of chemical used to make plastics and other materials more flexible. These chemicals may pose long-term risks to the development of the reproductive system and endocrine functions that regulate metabolism and hormone activity. Phthalates have been found in everyday household and children's items such as soft-plastic toys and baby lotions.

The CPSIA Act of 2008 banned the use of three phthalates in concentrations greater than 0.1 percent in children’s toys. Since February 2009, it has been unlawful to manufacture or import children’s toys and child care articles violating these standards, said the CPSC.

Manufacturers now have until December 31, 2011 to comply with the third-party testing rule.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Chrissie Cole

Study - Toxic Chemicals Found In Pregnant Women

Chrissie Cole — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 08:02:00 GMT

Pregnant women in the U.S. have dozens of potentially toxic or even cancer-causing chemicals in her body – including such ingredients as those found in flame retardants – according to newly published study in Environmental Health Perspectives.

Nearly all of the 268 women involved in the study had the presence of a wide range of chemicals linked to pesticides, flame retardants and epoxy resins in their bodies, said lead author Tracey Woodruff, director of the University of California-San Francisco Program on Reproductive Health and Environment.

People should not panic, but instead follow steps to ensure fewer chemicals enter the body.

To reduce the risk of harmful chemicals, pregnant women should eat more organic food, and avoid cosmetics with phthalates as well as avoid smoking and smoke. For more information, visit here.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Chrissie Cole

Friendly Fire - Burn Pits in Iraq

Kevin Ryan — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:50:37 GMT

My father was a West Point graduate and retired from the U. S. Air Force after more than 30 years of service. When I hear about the conduct of our military, I am reminded of the West Point motto and code of conduct: Duty Honor Country. Reading the Washington Post article this past Friday on the open air burn pits Halliburton Company and Kellogg Brown and Root operated at bases in Iraq serving Army and Air Force personnel, I had to wonder — what was their code of conduct?

At Joint Base Balad north of Baghdad, styrofoam, plastics, rubber, petroleum products, unexploded ordnance, paint, solvents and medical waste, including amputated limbs, went into the burn pit according to an Army Times report on a December 20, 2006, memo by Air Force Lt. Col. Darrin Curtis, Ph.D., P.E., former bio-environmental flight commander at the base. Lt. Col. Curtis called the burn pit "an acute health hazard" with "the possibility for chronic health hazards associated with the smoke." Air Force Lt. Col. James Elliott, former chief of aeromedical services for the 332^nd Air Expeditionary Wing, co-signed Curtis’ memo and wrote "the known carcinogens and respiratory sensitizers released into the atmosphere by the burn pit present both an acute and chronic health hazard to our troops and the local population."

The article in The Post on Friday, August 6, 2010, ran a photo of a thick, black cloud rising from a burn pit near Baghdad. Above it was a photograph of Air Force Lt. Colonel Michele Pearce who served at Camp Victory in Iraq for 4 months in 2006. Breathing air fouled by burn pit smoke, her symptoms included a rash that spread over her face, a runny, irritated nose and an upset stomach. These were nothing compared to the diagnoses she received after returning to Virginia: rare cancers in one lung and in her stomach lining. Lt. Col. Pearce is 40 and has two children. She has now joined 240 others with lawsuits in federal court in Baltimore, Maryland, suing Halliburton Company, Kellogg Brown & Root LLC, KBR, Inc., and KBR Services, Inc., for conducting waste disposal in Iraq by burning anything and everything in open pits, regardless of who was downwind. See www.burnpitlawsuit.com

According to The Post, the Department of Defense’s Force Health Protection and Readiness Programs acting director R. Craig Postlewaite said it is "plausible and even likely that a relatively small number of people . . . may be affected by more serious, longer term health effects." The government is studying the exposures.

It took decades to officially recognize that cigarette smoke kills people. The American Heart Association website www.americanheart.org says "cigarette smoking is the most important preventable cause of premature death in the United States." In addition, "the link between secondhand smoke (also called environmental tobacco smoke) and disease is well known, and the connection to cardiovascular-related disability and death is also clear. About 22,700 to 69,600 premature deaths from heart and blood vessel disease are caused by other people’s smoke each year."

If secondhand cigarette smoke is a recognized health hazard causing tens of thousands of deaths a year, what were Halliburton and the KBR companies thinking about the burn pit smoke fouling the air breathed by our troops? These are not mom-and-pop trash disposal services but knowledgeable and sophisticated global engineering companies.

According to the Plaintiff’s First Consolidated MDL Complaint filed in federal court in Baltimore, they burned trucks, tires, lithium batteries, oil and lubricating products, hydraulic fluids, bio-hazard materials, solvents, items containing pesticides, PVC pipes and hundreds of thousands of plastic water bottles in open air burn pits. http://www.burnpitlawsuit.com/AmendedConsolidatedComplaint.pdf#page=22 Imagine the second hand smoke if you rolled all that into a cigarette and fired it up. If burning these materials in open pits at military bases in the U.S. is not allowed because of danger to the health and safety of our service people, how could such conduct be safe in Iraq?

Many smoke plume health effects were obvious in Iraq. A Texas surgeon who worked at Balad for 4 ½ months in 2007-08 had headaches at the base that lasted for three months after he got home. He said nearly everyone had some form of the "plume crud" including nasal congestion, sinus problems, bad headaches, and "coughing up black stuff." A hundred or more personal accounts of similar and more serious complaints can be found at Burn Pit Stories on the web.

KBR operated 28 burn pits in Iraq according to The Post. While KBR denies operating the burn pit at Balad, its involvement in that burn pit operation has not been determined in the Baltimore lawsuit.

According to the lawsuit website, service people exposed to burn pit smoke are suffering a wide range of symptoms and diseases following their return from Iraq, including cancers (lung, brain, bone, skin), leukemia, chronic coughs, chronic bronchitis, chronic respiratory infections, constrictive bronchiolitis, reactive airway disease, small airway disease, sleep apnea, breathing restrictions, cramps and severe abdominal pain, vomiting, throat infections, nose bleeds, allergy-like symptoms, severe and chronic headaches and more.

On May 12, 1962, General Douglas MacArthur spoke to the corps of cadets at West Point on the code embodied in "Duty Honor Country" and said "the soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war." Disease and death from burn pit poisoning should not be a cost or consequence of war for those who give of themselves by serving our country. Burn pit operations that poison our troops undermine the health and lives of the individuals who serve, the strength of our military services, and the integrity of our country.

The article in The Post reported DOD spokeswoman Cynthia O. Smith as saying that most burn pits in Iraq have been shut down. Unfortunately, however, it appears that U.S. casualties from this version of Friendly Fire will continue to mount. Ms. Smith said that as of June, burn pits in Afghanistan were in use at 166 locations.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Kevin Ryan

Cancer Chemicals in the Water at Camp Lejeune

Kevin Ryan — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:17:14 GMT

When presidential candidates and senators talk about their desire to go into "public service," they talk as if they are sacrificing themselves for the voters when they are seeking the highest levels of power and influence in the federal government, along with the perks and luxuries those offices afford. If they want to talk about sacrifice and public service, they can tell it to the Marines. The men and women in the Marines, their spouses, and their children know the sacrifices and hardships of service, separation during deployments, and of going overseas to live, fight, and perhaps die for this country of ours. Presidents and senators don’t live and work in Marine Corps housing and offices, and they don’t risk life and limb in the course of their public service. We don’t expect that, but what we do expect is that the president and senators will support the troops, and that they will have the backs of those who served, and who now suffer in ways they never expected due to the contaminated water piped into their homes during their service at Camp Lejeune.

This past weekend Jerry Ensminger (Ret., U.S.M.C.) and Mike Partain came to Roanoke to spread the word about 30 years of water contamination at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. The water contamination by industrial solvents, gasoline and other chemicals has left a legacy of stillborn infants, infant deaths, birth defects, childhood leukemia, and cancers and diseases in Marines, their spouses, and children. Mike Partain was exposed in utero at Camp Lejeune in 1967 and at age 39 developed a form of cancer rare in men.

According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the Tarawa Terrace water system at Camp Lejeune was contaminated from 1957 to 1987. ATSDR is currently working on a study to determine the extent of the contamination in the Hadnot Point water system during that time. The contaminants included chemicals such as VOCs (volatile organic compounds) PCE, TCE, DCE, and vinyl chloride. In addition to industrial solvents, they also included Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl benzene and Xylene. These chemicals are known to cause miscarriages, birth defects (heart defects, neural tube defects, cleft palate and others), non Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, and cancers of the breast, lung, liver, kidney, ovaries, bladder, cervix, prostate and more.

During the 30 years of exposure, as many as a million Marines, sailors, and family members on the base may have been affected by chemicals in their drinking and bathing water. This water was pumped out of wells on the base that had a chemical dump, fuel farms, a fleet service area, and other sites on the base leaking and dumping chemicals into the ground, contaminating the ground water. The diseases caused by these poisons may kill quickly or may take ten or twenty years or more to appear; long after you would think to connect your disease with either Camp Lejeune or the water there. Those who lived at Camp Lejuene before 1987 or who may have been affected there while in utero should go to the U.S.M.C. website (www.marines.mil) and register to receive information on Camp Lejeune water and the research being done. You should also visit the website The Few, The Proud, The Forgotten (www.tftptf.com) for further information and to sign on to the Illness Registry.

The Janey Ensminger Act, named after Jerry Ensminger’s 9-year-old daughter who died of leukemia, is currently before Congress to require the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide health care to Marines, sailors and family members suffering from their exposure to contaminated well water at Camp Lejeune. The more names on the Marine website and the more names brought to the attention of politicians, including senators and the president, the more likely it is that our politicians will provide tangible care for our service people and their families and put some substance behind the slogan, Support Our Troops. Until then, Jerry Ensminger and Mike Partain intend to soldier on, spreading the word about the chemical contamination at Camp Lejeune that has touched their lives and the lives of countless others.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Kevin Ryan

Motorcycle Hazard Alert: Cell Phone Intoxicated Drivers

Kevin Ryan — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 16:40:55 GMT

You can ride around all day in a car with the windows down and the sunroof open on the best roads with the best scenery and it still doesn’t compare, doesn’t even come close, to being out there on a bike, in the wind, feeling the curves, throttle in hand. I’ve been reading articles on motorcycle safety saying to get a bike with anti-lock brakes and never speed but I like my bike as it is and when conditions are right and traffic is light or non-existent, I don’t always keep strictly to the speed limit. But I watch for road hazards and the world has changed, not because of improved equipment or riding techniques but by the nature of the hazards. The main hazards used to be left-turning drivers, sand, and gravel on the road, deer, and drivers coming out of side streets and driveways. Now we’ve got a whole new breed of road hazard — the 4-wheel drivers on cell phones.

Nearly every week you can read a new report, study, or article that says a driver talking on a cell-phone is as distracted or impaired as a driver who is legally intoxicated. In Virginia, it is now illegal to text while driving, but the driving and cell phone talking goes on. At some point legislators may take action when there are enough car drivers, car passengers, and pedestrians who die or suffer brain injury or paralysis due to cell-phone impaired drivers. Until that day comes, the hazard of cell-phone impaired drivers is upon us. On a motorcycle, you need to have mental radar to spot these drivers. It would be nice if they had a light mounted on the top of their cars that flashed when they were talking on their phones, but that’s not happening.

With these drivers you can set your spacing between cars, take the most visible position in your lane, wear brightly colored gear, have a headlight that flickers, weave a bit, and still be invisible. The reason we have this failure to communicate is because a cell phone conversation takes the driver’s mind someplace other than the road in front, to the sides, and behind them. With these drivers, our job is evasion and survival. We are back to looking for the clues that tipped us off to drivers intoxicated by alcohol who drove under the threat of being ticketed and locked up. Now your mental radar needs to be alert for the car that is slow to take off when a light changes from red to green, the van driving slower than everyone else, the SUV that drifts onto the lines between lanes or changes lanes slowly with no signal, the van driving at you on your side of the road, or the car that speeds up and zooms ahead only to slow back down and drop back to a slower speed. Spot a car with open road ahead and six to ten vehicles bunched up behind and you probably have a winner. Any sign of erratic driving and an alarm should go off in your head to put space between you and that car or van.

I know my bike, my gear, and my limits and I ride accordingly but when it comes to being safe out there, we are up against drivers who are driving to distraction, impaired by their cell phones. Cell phones have such an appeal that the number of impaired drivers on the road these days is far beyond what it was in the days when alcohol was the intoxicant of choice. When you are fastening the strap on your helmet, remember to turn on your mental radar. And have an alert summer.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Kevin Ryan

Study Shows Link Between Nurse Interruptions, Medication Errors

Chrissie Cole — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:15:00 GMT

Interrupting nurses as they prepare and administer medications may increase the number of medication errors, according to a newly published study in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Interruptions have long been to blame for medical errors. But this study is the first to directly observe the link between distractions and mistakes in nursing care.

For the study, researchers observed 98 nurses as they prepared and administered 4,271 medications to 720 Australian hospital patients. They discovered interruptions occurred more than half of the time (53.1%), which led to procedural failure rate of 85 percent and a clinical failure rate of nearly 40 percent.

Errors were interpreted as failing to read the medication label [procedural failure] or giving the incorrect dosage [clinical error]. Nearly 80% of the errors were minor and had little impact on patients.

Since nurses play such a critical role in hospitals, interruptions are inevitable, the study authors acknowledge. There is, however, a need to study the high interruption rate they observed in their research, the authors write.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Chrissie Cole

Which Nursing Homes Provide the Best Care: For-Profit or Non-Profit?

Dan Frith — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:14:44 GMT

Choosing a nursing home for a loved one can be a very difficult and emotional decision. We all want to be sure that our family member is being well-cared for and their physical and emotional needs are met when we cannot be there all the time. Nursing homes are usually either for-profit or non-profit. The question remains, which of these two is the better option; does a for-profit nursing home provide better care to its residents than a not-for-profit?

A study/report completed in August 2009 seems to indicate that not-for-profit nursing homes may provide better care. For some, this may seem a naturally obvious conclusion because not-for-profit nursing homes are not driven by profit margins and so, theoretically, they are only interested in providing the best care for their patients and residents. Further, not-for-profits generally rely on the donations and generosity of the public for their funding and so they must provide exemplary care in order to keep themselves in business. Finally, many not-for-profit nursing homes are owned by missions or religious organizations and, according to their mission statements alone, they are not profit driven. The British Medical Journal drafted a report which showed that not-for-profits gained more five-star ratings than their for-profit competitors.

For-profits are required to work, as their name implies, to create a profit for the owners and so they are dollar-driven; this sometimes means they are required to operate with reduced labor forces, less expensive meals, or cheaper resources in order to meet the bottom-line. In other words, fewer nurses on the payroll means more profit and the end of the day.

Despite these generalized statements, there is no black and white distinction between the level of care provided by for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes. As with any type of service, the best approach is to shop around before selecting a home in which to place your loved one. Be sure to look for things such as the number of staff members the facility has for each resident.

The primary goal in selecting a nursing home is to ensure they provide the best possible care. The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) has a checklist which provides criteria family's should consider when selecting a nursing home. With the British Medical Journal report and the general knowledge we have of for-profit and not-for-profit business, the findings seem to indicate that for the most part, not-for-profit nursing homes provide better care.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Dan Frith

Attorneys General Request Suspension of Medicare 5 Star Rating System for Nursing Homes

Dan Frith — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:37:08 GMT

Thirty state attorneys general have asked the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to suspend and revise its Five-Star rating system. The Five-Star system, launched in December 2008, gives each nursing facility a rating between one and five stars, based on the facility’s inspection record, staffing levels, and “quality measures” (e.g., percentage of residents with pressure sores or urinary tract infections).

In short, the Five-Star system grades facilities on a curve within a state, and the attorneys general are requesting ratings that could be compared from state to state. It is unclear how much of an issue this is for consumers, since in most (but not all) cases the search for a facility is done solely within one state.

A copy of the request is available on the National Senior Citizens Law Center (NSCLC) website.

My Take: Attorneys General are politicians and money is the financial life-blood of any successful politician. My guess is that deep-pocketed owners of nursing homes made a little telephone call to their state's attorney general and told them the money will stop unless you help us. Unfortunately, the politicians decided money for re-election was more important than informing the public about which nursing homes in their state provide poor care. A sad commentary indeed!

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Dan Frith

Norfolk Newspaper Comments on Roanoke Valley Nursing Homes

Dan Frith — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:59:44 GMT

The Examiner.com, presumably the online edition of the Norfolk (Virginia)Examiner newspaper, had an interesting article yesterday on nursing homes in the Roanoke, VA area. The article was written by Cara Joyce.

The article only mentioned three area nursing homes: Friendship Manor, Avante, and Carrington Place in Daleville.

Why were these three nursing homes mentioned? Certainly not because of their high ratings with Medicare. I quickly took a look at the Medicare Nursing Home Compare site and found out that Friendship Manor and Avante received 1 star out of a possible 5 star rating. Carrington Place did only slightly better by receiving 2 stars out of the maximum rating of 5 stars.

I am not a school teacher but it looks to me that all three nursing homes in the Roanoke Valley received a failing grade.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Dan Frith

Watch Out for Old Bones: They Break Easily

Dan Frith — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:45:03 GMT

Accidents in nursing homes are causing injury and even death to our nation’s elderly. In fact, each year average sized nursing homes of approximately 100 beds report anywhere from 100 to 200 slip and falls. Although not all accidents result in fatalities, those that fall may experience reduced quality of life, difficulty in movement, or other serious injuries.

The figures of nursing slip or fall accidents are staggering. Nursing home residents account for 20% of the fall related deaths for those 65 years and older. Of those living in nursing homes, 3 out of 4 residents will slip or fall within the year. This figure is twice the number of those older adults living outside nursing homes in the community. Even more alarming is the fact that residents are falling more than once throughout the year. The average number is 2.6 falls per the year for each nursing home resident.

These falls do not always allow for an easy or quick recovery. Approximately 1,800 people who reside in nursing homes die each year from slips or falls. Those that fall but do not suffer a fatal injury, can disable themselves for the rest of their life, causing depression and feelings of helplessness.

So why are these falls occurring more frequently in nursing homes? The answer is obvious: Residents in nursing homes are usually more dependent and frail than those living outside homes in the community.

With the incidence of falls on the rise, prevention is essential in nursing homes. Prevention steps can include staff education as to risk factors that lead to falls, making resident life easier and more convenient to the residents, and making changes in facilities such as adjusting toilet heights, adding hand rails, and lowering bed heights. Also, making hip pads available to patients to help support them during a fall could prevent serious injuries.

For those with loved ones in nursing homes, or those that work in nursing homes, ensuring that the facilities meet appropriate and safe conditions can mean the difference between longevity and healthy life for your loved ones, or a possibility of a slip and fall accident.

My Advice: First, don't be a victim...be proactive and insist that the facility take appropriate actions and implement safeguards to reduce or prevent falls. Second, if you, or anyone you know has been victim of a slip and fall in a nursing home, contact legal counsel to discuss your legal rights.

Originally posted at The Legal Examiner by Dan Frith