Now, lawsuit aside (I don't want to have this degenerate into a yes they should-no they shouldn't sue) discussion--well unless it's civil) I am curious about these studies. There was a graphic which isn't included in the online version, but several facts were stated...
They claim that scientific tests consistently show that balls hit with modern aluminum bats travel at speeds faster than 100 mph. A ball batted with a wooden bat typically travels at speeds less than 100 mph, the family claims. Fronzuto estimated that a baseball hit with an aluminum bat typically travels about 15 percent to 25 percent faster than one struck with a wooden bat. Also... Fronzuto said comparing today's aluminum bats to those of 30 years ago "is like comparing a match to a blowtorch."
So there's research which backs up the fact that balls travel faster. But if you're hit by a baseball at 83 MPH will that translate into less injury then one hit at 95 mph? I think it's time for the MB to break out grant's samauri sword boy and rig it to hit baseballs. Have it test wooden an aluminum bats from both the 70's as well as today to get a baseline of what kind of speeds these bats produce.
Then do some ballistic gel studies or use an analog and see how much more damaging 95 is vs 83.
It should also be noted that this type of injury is a total freak injury to begin with. It's rare and unlikely, but I'd be curious to see how much more dangerous one is vs the other.
x-posted to mythbusters