United Allergy Labs Lawsuit -Secrets Uncovered in Petri Lawsuit

Allergy Labs – Secrets Uncovered in Petri Lawsuit

A number of allergy patients have found relief in the legal rights provided by a United States vs. Allergy Lab case. The plaintiffs’ claim that they were the victims of negligence due to the existence of un-permitted allergy products. This is especially significant in the event that the plaintiff has an allergy to some of the ingredients commonly used in the production of certain allergy products. Such substances include artificial preservatives, toxic chemicals, and inactive formaldehyde. Allergy lawyers are experts in dealing with cases such as this one where the victim has been wronged due to the presence of said elements in certain allergy products.

United Allergy Labs Lawsuit

The case was filed by the American Association of Housecall Dentists and Oral Medicine specialist in response to a suit filed by the National Institute of Health. The plaintiff in this case, Michael J. Shea, a resident of Englewood, New Jersey, had undergone allergy testing at the Allergy Products Research and Education Center (API) in Rockland, Maine. The testing consisted of two different sets of injections: one set was custom-made for his specific allergies, and the second set was a generic version meant to be used by other allergy sufferers.

Although allergy testing usually does not result in the identification of the specific allergen causing the allergic reaction, it can identify certain allergenic materials and ingredients which have the potential to cause the allergic reaction.

The Allergy Products Research and Education Center staff relied on a code which is part of the American Dental Association’s (ADA) ‘s Merck Manual. The manual states that the API test should be “designed” to identify specific allergens or irritants which have the potential to cause an allergic reaction in the dental patient.

Shea, who was diagnosed with hay fever and cat allergy, was determined to be the victim of negligence.

In the above allergy testing, the API staff did not take the necessary precautions to ensure the accuracy of the test. The Allergy Products Research and Education Center do not point fingers at the plaintiff or the defendant (one of whom is not a licensed dentist), but it does fault the allergy laboratory for conducting the improper allergy testing. Shea has filed a lawsuit against his former dental clinic, accusing the staff of negligence for conducting the allergy testing incorrectly.

The defendants have also faced a lawsuit brought against them by a different dentist. Dr. Robert Petri, who performed the allergy tests at the Allergy Products Research and Education Center, faces a lawsuit brought against him by the plaintiff’s attorney.

The plaintiff’s attorney claims that Petri failed to accurately identify the allergen sources in his allergy tests, leading to the conclusion that the plaintiff might have been exposed to “cemented substances,” which could have caused a reaction. Petri’s attorneys have denied liability. A jury will decide the case.

It is not uncommon for the Allergy Products Research and Education Center to receive a large number of Freedom of Information requests concerning the testing procedures at their facility.

This is partly because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not mandate the posting of this information on-line. Petri’s attorney states that he does not expect that the FDA will change the mandatory allergy warning labels that must be posted in every allergy laboratory. The result is that Petri may be required to pay damages to a third party that was potentially subjected to fraudulent conduct by his employers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *