3M PFAS trial delayed, more health claims filed
What 3M knew about PFAS?
The 3M Company has vowed to stop manufacturing PFAS chemicals by the end of 2025. The FOX 9 Investigators reviewed hundreds of hours of video depositions that shed new light on how company executives and scientists responded after first learning about the widespread contamination.
MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - A federal judge recently delayed the first trial in the PFAS litigation, known as a bellwether case, as more plaintiffs file health-related claims against 3M and other companies.
3M Bellwether trial to test health claims involving PFAS
What we know:
3M is one of five companies being sued for manufacturing firefighting foam that was used on military bases and airports.
The foam contained PFAS that contaminated drinking water in communities across the country.
3M recently agreed to pay up to $12.5 billion to settle environmental claims brought by water districts across the country.
However, the health-related claims brought by people who live near those military bases and airports are ongoing.
Thousands of people are accusing 3M and other companies that supplied the firefighting foam of causing serious health issues, including cancer.
Any plaintiff filing a claim must be diagnosed with kidney cancer, testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, thyroid cancer or liver cancer.
The federal judge in South Carolina also ruled that plaintiffs must prove they were directly exposed to the firefighting foam or lived in an area where the drinking water was contaminated.
RELATED: 3M sued by Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe over PFAS contamination
Dig deeper:
A bellwether trial was scheduled to begin this month, but the judge indefinitely delayed the proceedings, so attorneys could file any other cases that meet the criteria.
It is not clear how many additional cases have been filed, but the judge warned attorneys not to file without properly vetting the claims.
"To the extent that the large number of unfiled cases is the result of aggressive case acquisition advertising and marketing efforts, plaintiffs' counsel are reminded that they should not accept more cases than they can reasonably investigate and prosecute," Judge Richard Gergel wrote in an August filing.
A bellwether is a test trial that helps both sides better understand how other cases in the multi-district litigation will go.
It can either embolden attorneys to keep fighting or to reach a settlement.
The possible test trials had been narrowed to three plaintiffs who lived near military bases in Pennsylvania and were diagnosed with kidney cancer.
Earlier this year, 3M asked a judge to grant the company summary judgement and dismiss the cases, arguing there is not "sufficient evidence" to prove it was their product that caused the cancer.
"It is a high threshold to establish causation," 3M attorneys stated.
In 2012, a scientific panel concluded there is a "probable link" between PFAS and both testicular and kidney cancer.
3M executives have consistently denied that PFAS chemicals can have negative health impacts, despite alarming findings from its own internal research.
The FOX 9 Investigators obtained video depositions of 3M scientists explaining what the company knew about the widespread contamination of the chemicals in human blood and the prevalence of cancer in its workers.
Another 3M study had to be terminated in the 1970s because test monkeys kept dying.
"That was a fork in the road where 3M could have said, ‘Wait a minute, monkeys are dying because they're being exposed to our chemicals. Maybe we should put a pause,’" former Attorney General Lori Swanson said as part of a FOX 9 documentary about 3M and forever chemicals.
"But they took the fork that would lead them to make more money."
WATCH: EVERYWHERE & FOREVER: BLOOD. WATER. AND THE POLITICS OF PFAS.
3M continued to manufacture the chemicals for decades, including to make blockbuster products containing PFAS such as Scotchgard and the firefighting foam.
Everywhere & Forever: Blood. Water. And the Politics of PFAS.
A new FOX 9 documentary tells the inside story of how 3M contaminated the world?s blood and water. Video depositions exclusively obtained by the FOX 9 Investigators reveal what company executives said under oath.
The backstory:
The firefighting foam was marketed as a biodegradable product that was an environmentally safe way to suppress fires and "save lives."
Swanson said the company’s own research showed 3M knew that wasn’t true.
"That was a misrepresentation," Swanson said. "And it caused these companies that bought firefighting foam from 3M…to rely on what 3M told them to go out and spray firefighting foam into streams and to test with it."
A California company complained to 3M in 1988 after learning the firefighting foam was a "dangerous and harmful liquid" that was not degradable, according to internal records unearthed as part of the State of Minnesota’s lawsuit against 3M.
"They went to 3M and said, we want you to come clean. We want you to reveal your toxicity findings. We want you to reveal your environmental impact findings and let everybody know the toxicity of the chemicals and that they don't biodegrade in the environment," Swanson said.
A 3M employee later warned this "misconception will eventually be discovered, and when that happens, 3M will likely be embarrassed."
Swanson said the firefighting foam wasn’t just used to put out fires.
"Firefighters were given this foam and they would do a lot of training with firefighting foam, live training exercises, all thinking…this was a safe chemical that didn't harm the environment and that wasn't true, and 3M knew that it was not true."
3M stopped manufacturing firefighting foam in 2002, according to a recent court filing by the company.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys seemed confident a trial was imminent given a bellwether case was scheduled.
One attorney who has written status updates on the litigation said a looming trial spurred 3M to settle the environmental claims in 2023.
The FOX 9 Investigators previously reported one of 3M’s largest insurance carriers, AIG, has argued its policies do not cover the company’s "PFAS-related liability."