Nowhere in my comment did I suggest that "junk science", as you call it, has not been used to fraudulently or wrongly win suits. I'm sure that this happens all the time. My entire point was that in our legal system, in civil suits it is entirely the claimant's responsibility, not the courts', to demonstrate that the plaintiff's expert technical witnesses are in fact making fraudulant and/or unsound claims. If they fail to do this, it's their fault, from a legal point of view, not the plaintiff's, even if they acted unethically and essentially lied.

And I find it hard to believe that hugely wealthy corporations cannot come up with the money to support research that legitimately refutes such "junk science". If they fail to do this, it's likely due to either professional incompetence by their lawyers, or that such research simply cannot be legitimately supported by real science.

As for criminal cases, well, it is the government's ethical responsibility to present only solid and sound evidence and testimony, and to spare no effort in refuting unsound and dishonest evidence and testimony that the defense might use. If it fails to do this, it will have been remiss in its duties and obligation to the public that it serves.

My point was not to dispute your assertion that there is such a thing as "junk science", that has been used for dubious ends, but rather to point out that one, corporations (and government) are the originators and abusers of it as much and likely more so than they are its alleged victims, and two, to the extent that they are its legitimate victims, it is their fault that they allow themselves to be its victims (I simply cannot have pity for organizations that have revenues in the billions and trillions and more than ample resources to refute such "junk science").

Plus, I would venture to guess that the problem of "junk science" being used BY corporations (and government) to further their goals is far more prevalent and detrimental to society than the problem of it being used AGAINST them. Ambulance chasers and litigious plaintiffs are not this country's problem to anywhere near the degree that dishonest government agencies and corporations are. The undeniable existance of the former in no way mitigates the vastly greater crimes and harms perpetrated by the latter.

The "free market" works only on paper, and even then only in overly simplified form, just like its polar opposite doppelganger communism. Always has, always will.