'No proof that plaques harmful': insurance lawyers
3 Sep 08
Industry's legal team argue against proposed law extending compensation
Lawyers acting for insurance firms have argued that the lung condition pleural plaques can be seen as a good thing because it proves that the body's defences work.
The insurance industry is arguing against proposed Holyrood legislation which would overturn for Scotland a House of Lords ruling in an English appeal last year that those affected could not claim compensation for the condition, a result of exposure to asbestos.
Dr Pamela Abernethy from the Forum of Insurance Lawyers said there was no proof that pleural plaques were harmful and that they were simply the body's "physiological response to the presence of foreign fibres".
She added that the even without plaques, people could develop life-threatening lung illnesses, such as mesothelioma.
Dr Abernethy was giving evidence to MSPs about the Damages (Asbestos-Related Conditions) (Scotland) Bill. Gilbert Anderson, also of the forum, said the bill was well intentioned but wrong.
However, Harry McCluskey from Clydeside Action on Asbestos, whch has campaigned for compensation for those affected by asbestos-related illnesses, said there should be no argument but that those suffering from pleural plaques should be compensated.