Originally published February 22 2006
Lawsuit against Philip Morris demands annual lung cancer screenings for group of smokers
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
In Brooklyn, a class actions suit filed against Philip Morris by four plaintiffs seeks for the tobacco company to pay for annual lung cancer screenings for the plaintiffs.
A group of longtime Marlboro cigarette smokers sued Philip Morris on Thursday, but not for cash.
Instead, they want the tobacco giant to pay for annual high-tech screenings they say would catch lung cancer in its early stages.
Like other tobacco lawsuits, the complaint filed by four plaintiffs in federal court in Brooklyn alleges they were victims of deceptive marketing of a deadly product.
It seeks class action status for anyone over the age of 50 who has smoked the equivalent of one pack a day for at least 20 years.
The suit claims the procedure _ which can cost up to $500 and is not normally covered by health insurance _ could save thousands of lives by detecting lung cancer before it becomes deadly.
"Philip Morris is obligated morally, not just legally, to make a health investment to help prevent death and suffering caused by the Marlboro smoke," said the smokers' attorney Jerome H. Block.
In a 2001 case brought against Philip Morris, a West Virginia jury found that the manufacturer had no obligation to provide cancer screening for the state's healthy and former smokers; a Louisiana jury made a similar finding in 2003.
"This surveillance, if made available, will save the lives and ease the suffering of a significant number of the members of the proposed class."
But CT scans also have high false positive rates _ a concern that's kept major cancer research groups from endorsing routine screening.
The possibility of early detection outweighs the drawback of false alarms, said Dr. Steven Markowitz, a specialist in occupational and environmental medicine and epidemiology at Queens College, City University of New York.
"My view is that for a defined high-risk population, you give them the choice of a CT scan," he said.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml