The study, sponsored by Boots Pharmaceuticals (since acquired by Knoll) and performed 7 years ago by Betty Dong's group at the University of California, San Francisco, concluded that cheaper generic thyroid drugs were "interchangeable" with the drug Synthroid. But Knoll, which claims the study is flawed, allowed Dong to publish the work in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) only last spring, after unwelcome publicity (Science, 25 April, p. 525). The class-action lawsuits claim that consumers needlessly spent billions of dollars on the more expensive brand during the period the study was suppressed. The proposed settlement, announced 30 October, would guarantee that at least 5 million patients who used Synthroid over the past 7 years could each receive about $20 before legal fees.

Ironically, the company--which admits no wrongdoing--may have had little to lose by allowing Dong to publish her study in the first place. At a press conference to explain the settlement, Knoll President Carter Eckert said that Synthroid's market share has not changed since the JAMA article's publication. The U.S. District Court in Chicago is expected to give its final approval to the settlement next March.