I understand from Flying Lawyer's post that the court's decision does
not relate to cause of DVT but only to the strictly legal matter
of whether the occurence of DVT is compensable.
BA: "... but since the World Health Organisation and the House of
Lords agree that there is no evidence of a specific link between
flying and DVT ... "
Disingenuous! The House of Lords' Select Committee report is
excellent but to summarize its discussion in such simplistic
terms is misleading, as can be seen from one of the recommendations,
which reads "We recommend that airlines and their associates reappraise
their current practices in relation to not only the provision of
information for passengers but also the design of the cabin and cabin
service procedures."
"Dontcha hate the way Sky news calls it economy class syndrome?"
The name "economy class syndrome" originated in the British medical
literature in the 1970s. The press merely repeated it. DVT was
noticed among those sitting in cramped shelters for hours on end during
the London Blitz, 1940, hence the inferred association with economy
class. Whether or not the rate of DVT in air economy class pax is
greater than among other travellers does not appear to have been
conclusively established. The House of Lords' report suggests the
alternative descriptions "flight-related DVT" and "traveller's thrombosis."
"I think a study of pilots would be dismissed for a couple of reasons ..."
Not neccessarily. There are statistical procedures that deal with
multiple risk factors and you certainly would want subjects without any
risk factors at all. The main difficulty in such a study would be
obtaining the required data. The House of Lords' report rejected the
financing of comprehensive studies. On a cost-benefit basis I think that
they were right to do so.
"there was an interesting news article published a few days ago citing a
study which shows that DVT mortality rates from air travel are no higher
than those for the general population ... "
I think that you are referring to a University of the West of England/
Gloucestershire Royal Hospital study. It's new - no doubt its conclusions
will eventually be challenged. I can think of two obvious grounds. Its
mortality findings are based on the upward revising of PE mortality
rates in the general population. However, epidemiologists know that
incidence of DVT in travellers is also underestimated. When that number
is also revised upward the cited study, which was small anyway, will be
out of date. Secondly, PE mortality is relatively rare among those with
DVT (around 1%) so the study sheds little light on flight-related DVT.
The following data may be of interest. A large French study published
one year ago looked at pulmonary embolism that occurred among passengers
within one hour of landing at CDG. Draw your own conclusions, remembering
that the DVT rate would be about 100 times greater.
Code:
Distance (km) PE Rate (per million)
< 5000 0.01
> 5000 1.5
> 10000 4.8
Wobbler, there is one (surprising) study that goes even further than
your statement that "general good health does not reduce the chances
of developing a DVT." Looking at long distance travel (not only by air)
the study found that DVT among such travellers is idiopathic.