Blacktailslayer:
Good question . Here's my take on the whole situation. Thanks for the Quote.
First I think besides Lee Lakowsky (He certainly knows the truth) there are a number of TV and Prostaffers who need to respond to the hunting public for their endorsement of carbon clothing . Waddell and Nugent come to mind.

Carbon clothing companies need to provide actual proof of their claims or face the consequences of false advertising. They really have an up hill battle after the deposition of their own expert Dr.Amos Turk who admitted under oath that their product allowed human odor to pass through the garment unchanged and that the product contained very little carbon and was not effective in controling human odors. ( See Justia.com )
" 100 % of human odors 100% of the time "
" reactivate by putting in a household dryer"

I really don't think the lawsuit is the best answer but at the same time there really isn't another option. SL has used the courts for the past 10 years to control this market. Now they are going to be on the other side. Now they are being sued rather then being the ones who sue.( Robinson Labs twice , Gore , and No Trace ) Kind of poetic justice.

The real harm that has been done is that new and effective methods have been kept off the market. Take for example "No Trace ". They came with some new and interesting ideas and some real promise in the area of scent control. They were met with a lawsuit that destroyed the company and deprived the hunting public of a product that had real potential. As you read this there is testing being done on a new product that could change this whole debate. Some preliminary testing with dogs has been very encouraging and a major university is assisting in some research.