ndmckinney|net

“…has a fool for a client.” (Author unknown)

As most media outlets have already reported, Judge Roy Pearson lost his case against Custom Cleaners. Here’s the quick wrap-up.

The Good: Judge Bartnoff, the DC Superior Court judge who tried this case, correctly found that the interpretation of the consumer protection laws invoked by Pearson was not correct. As noted in her opinion, “[a] reasonable consumer would not interpret “Satisfaction Guaranteed” to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer’s unreasonable demands or to accede to demands that the merchant has reasonable grounds to dispute.”

The Bad: As the Washington Post’s Marc Fisher has noted, the case has cost the Chung’s over $100,000 in legal fees, plus business lost by Pearson’s campaign against them. They have been able to raise $35,000 in donations, but that will not be enough to cover their costs, and even if they are awarded attorney’s fees, it is unlikely that they will be able to collect, since it appears Pearson has no significant assets.

The Ugly: This case is not over yet. Pearson still faces a number of unanswered questions. Will he have to pay attorney fees? Will he face disciplinary action? WIll Mayor Fenty appoint him to a 10-year post in the DC court system? Until Bartnoff rules on the Rule 11 sanctions, there should be some

In the future, perhaps Pearson will think twice about representing people like himself. In the future, he should also consider machine-washable slacks.

According to today’s Washington Post, Virginia is planning on imposing a series of “civil remedial fees” on drivers who violate the commonwealth’s driving laws. The new fines, applicable only to Virginia residents, will be imposed beginning July 1.

About time.

Many of the driving laws on the books today, such as laws prohibiting speeding, are simply not effective because the penalties for violating the law are too low. Under the new Virginia system (New Jersey has a similar system, according to the Washington Post), the incentive not to violate the law will change dramatically. With potential costs for breaking the law increasing by several hundred percent, drivers would be wise to reconsider their driving habits.

As the Washington Post notes, the law will have a greater impact on poor drivers than on rich ones, since poor drivers will be less able to absorb the cost of the new fines. However, this argument is somewhat bankrupt, since it does not address the purpose of having the law: to punish inappropriate behavior. There will always be inequity; the law must find some way to deal with this. In this particular case, drivers are all equally capable of controlling their own driving behavior; since there is no logical connection between driving behavior and income, there is no reason to set fines to a level that accommodates the low-income driver at the cost of the law’s dissuasive effect.

Worst case scenario, the law will not make any differences in individual behavior. If this is the case, then there is no problem. Instead of having to increase taxes to pay for road maintenance or construction, the fines will pad the budget. Of course, budget increases have a negative side as well: they cause legislators (particularly ones trying to buy votes) to rely on a “projected” fee income and either cut taxes (unwise) or increase spending in unrelated areas (against the purpose of the fee). I have no doubt that the commonwealth of Virginia will see a substantial increase in revenue from these new fees; I just hope that they are not squandered.

What ever happened to the part of the Hippocratic Oath that says «do no harm»?

Tucked away in one of my wife’s magazines this week was an advertisement for a drug called «alli». The drug, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, is a non-prescription version of an existing, so-called «weight-loss» drug called Orlistast (the prescription form of the drug is called «Xenical»), a lipase inhibitor (more on that in a moment). As far as I can see, the only difference between the prescription and non-prescription is the dosage, 60mg for the over-the-counter version versus 120mg for the prescription version.

Orlistat has to be one of the worst pharmaceutical products on the market right now.

What bothers me most about the drug is that it doesn’t seem to do anything useful at all. It certainly does things to you. A lipase inhibitor, for those who don’t know, is a chemical that binds to digestive enzymes that break down triglycerides (fats) from food that is eaten into monoglycerides and free fatty acids that the body can absorb and process. If these fats are not broken down, they simply pass through the digestive tract. As a result, a person who takes this drug and then eats too much fatty food will experience the «treatment effect» (GSKs term, not mine) of too much fat simply sliding through the digestive tract. Yuck.

It is this «treatment effect» that is supposed to show the patient that the drug is working. In reality, the only thing that Orlistat does is punish someone who cheats on their diet. I’m not sure when the only side effect of a drug becomes a main reason for taking the drug, but I’m sure someone will be suing GSK over this drug (either for this effect or for the marketing claims of a 50% reduction in weight versus not taking the drug).

The other potential health risks (including vitamin-deficincy diseases and conflicting research about colon cancer) aside, the drug has no positive benefits. In order to be effective, according to the marketing literature, you must “commit[] to a reduced-calorie, low-fat diet.” I’m not sure how they conducted a controlled study of the drug when there are also the free variables of «reduced-calorie diet», «low-fat diet», and, given the requirement implicit marketing materials, «exercise». What diet plan does not include these? Would there really be a 50% weight-loss benefit for taking this drug and doing the things you are supposed to do to lose weight? Given that the weight-loss industry is enormous ($35 billion according to CBS news), GSK has every incentive to push another drug onto the market, even if that drug has no pharmaceutical value at all.

The drug was just approved this February, and this is the first marketing material I’ve seen for the drug «alli». I’m not usually one for litigation, but I think this is an instance where the threat of a lawsuit will pull a legitimately bad product off the market.

It’s cliché, but true; you can never really go back home after all.
I flew home from Amsterdam last Friday (01/06/07) via London Heathrow. Coming back to the US after 5 months of being away certainly opened my eyes to my own lifestyle, not to mention those of my fellow Americans. The stereotype of the US as fat, lazy, and arrogant is somewhat well deserved.

Before I left, I used to think that Washington, DC was one of the most sophisticated cities in the U.S. To some extent, I still think that’s true. But having been in Europe, and lived among the Europeans, I noticed that DC is really not any different from the rest of the US. Certainly, as I was told by my international friends who have visited Washington, it is the most European-like city, but it is a far cry from Paris or Den Haag.

Since my return, I’ve had an interesting time readjusting to being home. In some ways, it feels like I never left; in other ways, however, I feel completely detached from society. I’ve certainly never been one for popular culture or trends, and having been away from US culture for a while, I feel even less in touch with the general culture. I’m not sure exactly where I fit in, but I’m not so sure it’s here anymore.

I’m certainly not claiming to want everything to be European. I think that the European approach to life is very nice, but it is radically different from the US, and I do not think that it would do well here. In some ways, European attitudes are quite backwards from those in the US (for example, European life still revolves very much around the home, and many public arenas are closed quite early), although the US is not exactly leading the way in every area (we are quite conservative socially, as a general rule).

Overall, I would like to say that I had a great experience. I’m now to the last stage of my study abroad experience: reflection. Maybe after a few more weeks, I’ll be able to make more out of the entire trip.