like
there’s
a
worm
in
my
brain,
eating
away
at
my
sanity.
(Image
via
Getty)
For
most
of
the
20
years
that
I
worked
at
a
law
firm,
I
defended pharmaceutical
and
medical
device (and
other)
mass
torts.
The
things
that
you
do
professionally
can
create
a
bias: I
did
not
like
the
plaintiffs’
bar. I
never
defended
a
lawsuit
brought
on
behalf
of
a
single
individual,
so
I
saw
little
of
the
good
that
plaintiffs’
lawyers
do. But
I
saw
many
class
actions
and
mass
torts
that
seemed
designed
only
to
transfer
money
from
pharmaceutical
and
medical
device
companies
to
plaintiffs’
lawyers. Whether
a
drug
or
device
actually
harmed
anyone
was
beside
the
point;
anyone
who
was
actually
hurt
could
file
their
own
individual
lawsuit.
The
class
actions
and
mass
torts
picked
up
the
stragglers,
whose
situations
didn’t
merit
filing
a
case
—
people
who
overpaid
for
an
allegedly
dangerous
drug
(but
hadn’t
suffered
physical
injury)
and
wanted
to
recover
the
purchase
price;
people
who
hadn’t
been
hurt
yet
but
might
be
hurt
in
the
future;
people
who
didn’t
even
know
they
had
a
claim,
but
the
lawyer’s
advertisement
said
they
might
be
entitled
to
free
money.
Do
you
see
why
you
might
develop
a
distaste
for
these
shenanigans?
Many
of
my
fellow
mass
tort
defense
lawyers
were
hardcore
Republicans. Although
generalities
can
be
misleading,
there
was
a
widespread
perception
in
the
defense
bar
that
Democrats
appointed
pro-regulatory
folks
to
the
FDA. Democratic
regulatory
appointees
were
extraordinarily
tough
on
drug
companies. Democrats
also
appointed
many
judges
who
didn’t
like
to
grant
summary
judgment
in
cases
in
which
thousands
of
people
sued
the
manufacturer
of
some
drug
or
device: “The
evidence
might
be
pretty
thin,
but
thousands
of
people
are
claiming
that
the
bubble
gum
causes
brain
cancer! Who
am
I
to
throw
out
those
lawsuits?”
Mass
tort
defense
lawyers
just
had
to
vote
Republican.
That
was
the
only
chance
they
had
to
win
their
cases!
Where
do
mass
tort
defense
lawyers
stand
now?
Mass
tort
defense
lawyers,
as
a
group,
are
pretty
well
off
financially: They’re
partners
at
prestigious
defense
firms. These
folks
aren’t
really
motivated
by
the
culture
wars. Indeed,
as
I
heard
many
years
ago
(long
before
Trump):
“Mark,
you
should
vote
Republican. The
Republicans
just
say
that
crap
about
guns
and
abortion
to
placate
the
lunatics. What
really
matters
are
the
money
issues
—
taxes
and
spending
—
and
Republicans
are
much
better
than
Democrats
on
those.”
Mass
tort
defense
lawyers
generally
believed
in
free
trade;
these
folks
had
gone
to
college
when
the
benefits
of
free
trade
were
the
conventional
wisdom. Trump
has
disappointed
the
free
traders.
Mass
tort
defense
lawyers
believed
in
keeping
the
federal
deficit
under
control. Trump
has
let
them
down.
Mass
tort
defense
lawyers
tend
to
be
“law
and
order”
types. They
weren’t
happy
on
January
6,
2021,
when
Trump
unleashed
his
supporters
on
Congress,
and
they
weren’t
happy
on
January
20,
2025,
when
Trump
granted
a
wholesale
pardon
to
the
rioters.
These
lawyers
don’t
believe
in
a
weaponized
Department
of
Justice. They
were
outraged
when
federal
and
state
Democratic
administrations
indicted
Trump: “This
happens
only
in
Third
World
countries!”
Those
34
felony
convictions
posed
a
little
more
trouble
for
my
brethren
—
the
indictments
were
phony,
but
how
do
you
explain
convictions?
—
but
they
nonetheless
made
excuses: “The
trial
was
in
New
York
City. I
usually
believe
in
the
jury
system,
but
this
never
should
have
happened.”
Now
that
Trump’s
encouraging
his
Department
of
Justice
to
pursue
Letitia
James,
John
Bolton,
Jim
Comey,
and
others,
all
that’s
left
is
cognitive
dissonance. Maybe: “The
Democrats
did
it. Trump’s
mad. Fair
is
fair.”
But
Tylenol,
guys,
Tylenol!
Well-established
science
suggests
that
Tylenol
does
not
cause
autism
or
ADHD. In
the
mass
tort
litigation
involving
Tylenol,
the trial
court
threw
out the
plaintiffs’
claims,
saying
that
the
plaintiffs’
experts
used
unreliable
methodologies
and
failed
to
prove
a
credible
link
between
the
use
of
Tylenol
during
pregnancy
and
the
alleged
harms.
Junk
science,
guys,
junk
science!
We’ve
been
beating
that
drum
for
decades,
and
now
you
have
a
judge
who’s
on
your
side!
The appellate
argument on
the
trial
court’s
decision
is
scheduled
for
October
6.
And
now,
just
weeks
before
oral
argument,
Trump
and
RFK
Jr.
choose
to
announce
that,
on
the
basis
of
the
same
old
tired
evidence,
the
FDA
believes
that
taking
Tylenol
during
pregnancy
is
dangerous.
Might
now
be
the
time
to
break
your
inherited
allegiance
to
the
Republican
Party
and
move
on
to
sanity?
Doesn’t
Tylenol,
at
long
last,
give
you
a
headache?
Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
later
oversaw
litigation,
compliance
and
employment
matters
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected].