Last night I received an e-mail from J.R. Absher of Outdoor Life. The e-mail was in response to an earlier post of mine entitled “My Stance on Carbon Clothing“. J.R. informed me of a lawsuit that is brewing in Minnesota. According to the Star Tribune, four Minnesota hunters filed a lawsuit against ALS Enterprises, Inc., the manufacturer of “Scent-Lok”, ScentBlocker, and other lines of carbon clothing. Co-defendants of this class action lawsuite include Cabela’s, Gander Mountain, Bass Pro Shops, and Browning.  Vice President of ALS claimed that the company will stand behind “years of research” conducted by Intertek Testing Services and researchers at University of Windsor and North Carolina State University. For more details about the suit, please see J.R.’s post or the Star Tribune.

Here are some points to ponder as this story unfolds over the next few months:

1. This is a class-action lawsuit, filed on behalf of any Minnesota hunter who purchased the clothing.  That leaves 49 additional states with hunters who may have purchases carbon-clothing. As J.R. Absher pointed out to me in our e-mail correspondence,  many lawyers will love to get their hands on this class-action suit. MY POINT: this could get really ugly.
2. ALS Enterprises claims that they have research to support their product. They also stand behind “a written guarantee that says you’ll experience unalarmed wild animals downwind.” The main source of the research is a private research company (Intertek). According to this company’s website, its “strength is in helping clients reduce their time to market so they may increase their revenue potential.” The scientific community what is called a ‘peer-review process’ to validate scientific claims. That is, before a scientific study can be published in a scientific journal, it must undergo a process of peer review, during which other scientists evaluate the validity of the study’s claims. The problem with private research companies is that their research is not subjected to this peer-review process (at least not to my knowledge). MY POINT: Research by a company that is HIRED to support that product can be BIASED. If they don’t provide information that the company can use to market the product, then the company won’t get paid.
3. According to the Star Tribune, the carbon clothing business may be worth $100 million annually. Given my first point to ponder, this issue may get very sticky very quickly.

You’ll want to pay attention to this story as it develops, especially if you’ve purchases carbon clothing.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!