THE MORE WE KNOW, THE LESS INTELLIGENT WE ARE? HOW GENOMIC INFORMATION SHOULD, AND SHOULD NOT, CHANGE TOXIC TORT CAUSATION DOCTRINE

Advances in genomic science are rapidly increasing our understanding of disease and toxicity at the most fundamental biological level. Some say this heralds a new era of certainty in linking toxic substances to human illness in the courtroom. Others are skeptical. In this Article I argue that the new sciences of molecular epidemiology and toxicogenomics will evince both remarkable explanatory power and intractable complexity. Therefore, even when these sciences are brought to bear, toxic tort claims will continue to present their familiar jurisprudential problems. Nevertheless, as genomic information is used in toxic tort cases, the scientific developments will offer courts an opportunity to correct mistakes of the past. Courts will miss those opportunities, however, if they simply transfer attitudes from classical epidemiology and toxicology to molecular and genomic knowledge. Using the possible link between trichloroethylene and a type of kidney cancer as an example, I describe several causation issues where courts can, if they choose, improve doctrine by properly understanding and utilizing genomic information.