Lead Paint Poisoning

Jul 28, 2015 by

We now know that lead is a potent and poisonous metal that can cause serious medical problems. However, before this was discovered, lead was commonly used in products from paint to children’s toys. Even after the ban, products with lead remain, posing devastating health risks to those exposed to the metal. Lead is particularly dangerous if digested, making children even more susceptible to the dangers of lead, according to the website of Crowe Mulvey.

With the immense dangers lead poisoning poses, it is important to know the products that may contain this metal. One of the most common products known to contain lead before 1978 was paint. This means that homes built before this year may still contain this paint. Lead paint may also have been used to paint children’s toys and other products. This is dangerous as children have a tendency to chew on objects. Lead was not only used in paint, however. The metal was used in pipes and plumbing before it was shown to be dangerous. This poses the same risk of lead being in older homes, but also opens the possibility of lead contaminating drinking water if it was used in sink faucets. There is a number of other products that can potentially contain lead and cause poisoning. Lead poisoning can cause health risks in adults and developmental problems in children.

Poisoning of any kind is a terrifying thought. It can become even more scary when things you come into contact with on many occasions can cause it. Even though the use of lead to make a number of products has been stopped, it is still possible to come into contact with the metal. If you start to experience signs of lead poisoning or suspect your children may have been exposed to it, it is vital to visit a doctor as soon as possible.

read more

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

BP – No Intent of Not Paying Legitimate Claimants

Apr 23, 2014 by

It seems that the legal battle between British Petroleum (BP) and settlement claimants, who have been affected (or claim to have been affected) by the largest oil spill in US history, is far from over. After having paid more than $26 billion dollars on fines, compensation and cleaning up costs, the oil company suddenly cried foul over the decision made by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which supported a December 2013 U.S. District ruling that authorized settlement of economic loss claims by businesses and which removed any injunction that prevented such settlement.

In 2012, BP CEO Bob Dudley issued a statement, saying, “BP made a commitment to help economic and environmental restoration efforts in the Gulf Coast, and this settlement provides the framework for us to continue delivering on that promise, offering those affected full and fair compensation, without waiting for the outcome of a lengthy trial process.”

If such statement is true, then why is BP appearing to be walking away from the terms of the multibillion-dollar class-action settlement that it accepted in 2012? Well, for the simple reason that it saw a major fault in the system employed by the court-appointed claims office, which accepted and approved claims without requiring proof of economic losses traceable to the disaster. For BP, this resulted to costly payouts for losses wherein the oil spill had nothing to do at all.

BP does not intend to turn down anyone who will choose to appeal a BP oil spill claim. The firm is, in fact, prepared to settle all claims; but for these claims to be paid, the firm also asks that economic losses be proven as a result of the sea tragedy.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, despite the ire of its members (which is composed of local Chambers of Commerce and small businesses) surprisingly, has taken the side of BP. It ties BP to the terms of the settlement it entered into in 2012, saying that BP is legally bound to pay legitimate claimants, that is, those who are able to present evidence of losses being linked to the spill. The U.S. Chamber, however, believes that taking money from the firm, due to losses not connected to the spill (or despite not having suffered any losses at all), is a great injustice – a totally just, fair and logical statement: it is, therefore, quite a surprise why many have been made irate by these words.

read more

Related Posts

Tags

Share This