It was damning evidence that they had tried to addict people to a deadly drug, yes. But the grounds for *damages* were recouping health care expenditures. Under that same logic, if the food industry doesn't straighten up, it might have to shell out. Things like marketing foods with little to no nutritional value to kids, recieving government subsidies to provide high fat (dairy and meats) foods for the school lunch programs -- which makes it difficult for lunch programs to increase their nutritional value, lobbying by meat & dairy which heavily influences FDA requirements (which contributes heavily to our nutrition education in the schools). The fact that "moderation in all things" is preached despite the fact that there are foods (like soda) that have no nurtritional value, just empty calories, and god help the educator in the schools who says it (as the soft drink industry provides important funds to cash strapped schools). The more I learn, the more afeared I am.

The biggest thing I've learned is to ask what benefit there is in maintaining the status quo when lots of people are sick with a particular disease. In some cases its money (tobacco, obesity), in others preservation of moral standards (HIV, cholera epidemics -- which connected with anti-immigrant sentiment/feeling).... lawsuits are not always the sanswer. But they can spark change -- as can the fear of them.