This book provides a comparative account of the legal and scientific issues relating to proof of causation in alleged cases of drug-induced injury, principally in Europe and North America. It seeks to assess whether, by using probabilistic approaches, the courts may more accurately determine the cause of adverse reactions contentiously associated with drugs. In four case studies (DES, Bondoctin, vaccine damage and "Gulf War Syndrome"), the deficiencies of orthodox approaches to causation are revealed. A sustained argument is presented in favour of according greater weight to epidemological statistics, as refined by the application of the Bayes' Theorem.A valuable feature is the discussion of the role of expert witnesses, including an examination of how the author's proposals could be accommodated within the reformed civil process envisaged by the Woolf Report.The book also examines the economic implications of these proposals. It is a timely contribution to the resolution of the legal problems in this complex area of tort law.

This book gives a comparative account of the legal and scientific issues of proving causation in alleged cases of drug-induced injury. It demonstrates that orthodox methods are flawed, and considers whether a different approach should be used.

Chapter 1 - Causation and Medicinal Products: A Legal and Probability AnalysisChapter 2 - Diethylstilbestrol and CausationChapter 3 - Scientific Evidence, Causation and the Law: Lessons of Bendectin (Debendox) LitigationChapter 4 - Vaccine Damage and Causation: A Comparative PerspectiveChapter 5 - Causation, Medicinal Products and the "Gulf War Syndrome"Chapter 6 - Causation and Medicinal Products: An Economic AnalysisChapter 7 - The Development Risk Defence and Medicinal ProductsChapter 8 - Possible Economic Consequences of Probabilistic Approaches to CausationChapter 9 - Conclusion