In a landmark verdict that has food industry giants scrambling, a Los Angeles man has been awarded $25 million in damages after a jury determined that chronic exposure to aerosolized cooking spray triggered his severe lung disease. Michael Harlan, a 52-year-old former chef, collapsed in his kitchen five years ago, gasping for air amid fumes from a popular non-stick spray he used daily. What began as a routine cooking mishap spiraled into a lifetime battle with bronchiolitis obliterans—commonly known as "popcorn lung"—a irreversible condition scarring the smallest airways of the lungs.
Harlan's ordeal traces back to 2021, when he started relying on the spray, marketed as a healthy alternative to butter, to whip up meals for his family and catering business. Court documents reveal he inhaled massive quantities of the propellant gases and chemical additives, including propellants like propane and butane, which medical experts testified bypassed his respiratory defenses. "It was like breathing in poison every day," Harlan recounted during testimony, his voice strained through an oxygen mask. Lung biopsies confirmed the damage, linking it directly to the product's ultrafine particles that lodge deep in the alveoli.
The trial, which captivated health advocates and consumer watchdogs, pitted Harlan against ConAgra Brands, the maker of the spray under its PAM brand. Lawyers for Harlan presented internal company emails suggesting executives downplayed inhalation risks despite lab tests showing lung irritation in animal studies. Defense attorneys argued user error and pre-existing conditions, but the eight-person jury sided unanimously with the plaintiff after three days of deliberations, citing negligence in labeling and formulation.
ConAgra issued a terse statement vowing to appeal, claiming the award "sets a dangerous precedent" for household products. Yet the ruling echoes prior cases, like the 2010 $7.2 billion judgment against makers of microwave popcorn laced with diacetyl, another flavoring chemical tied to popcorn lung among factory workers. Critics in the food sector warn of a chilling effect on innovation, while public health groups hail it as a wake-up call amid rising reports of respiratory illnesses linked to everyday aerosols.
Beyond the payout—which includes $10 million for medical costs and lost wages, plus punitive damages—Harlan's win underscores a growing scrutiny of "convenience" chemicals in consumer goods. As Americans cook more at home post-pandemic, questions swirl about regulatory oversight from the FDA, which classifies cooking sprays as food additives rather than strictly testing them for inhalation hazards. Legal experts predict a flurry of similar suits, potentially reshaping how Big Food formulates and markets its staples.
