Fw: The Chemical Papers: Secrets of the Chemical Industry Exposed ~ PBS Mon. 3/26

[Guest guest]

From: " ilena rose " <ilena@...>

Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 9:40 AM

Subject: The Chemical Papers: Secrets of the Chemical Industry Exposed ~ PBS

Mon. 3/26

> The Chemical Papers: Secrets of the Chemical Industry Exposed

> Don Hazen, AlterNet March 15, 2001

> from: http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=10600

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Bill Moyers TV special to reveal how the public was kept in the dark about

> the dangers of toxic chemicals.

>

>

> Every powerful story about fighting for truth and justice has its heroes.

> This story, a tale of the secrets and lies behind America's chemical

> industry, is no exception.

>

>

> Like Brockovich, the paralegal-turned-movie icon who fought against

> toxic polluters in California, Elaine Ross was determined to uncover the

> truth. Ross wanted to know what had killed her husband, a chemical plant

> worker in the bayous of Louisiana, at the untimely age of 46. She teamed

up

> with crusading lawyer " " Baggett, Jr, the son of a famous

> Southern litigator, and together they have become central figures in a

> -and-Goliath battle to protect the health of all Americans,

especially

> workers.

>

>

> Now, in the latest chapter of the story, a team led by Bill Moyers has

> created a PBS special report called " Trade Secrets " that will air on

Monday

> evening, March 26. The special, based on a secret archive of chemical

> industry documents, explores the industry pattern of obfuscating, denying

> and hiding the dangerous effects of chemicals on unsuspecting workers and

> consumers.

>

>

> At its core, the Moyers show asks a deeply troubling question: With more

> than 75,000 synthetic chemicals having been released into the environment,

> what happens as our bodies absorb them, and how can we protect ourselves?

As

> part of the report, Moyers took tests designed to measure the synthetic

> chemcials in his body -- a measurement known as " chemcial body burden. "

> Moyers learned that his body contained 31 diffferent types of PCBs, 13

> different toxins and pesticides such as malathion and DDT.

>

>

> When it hits the air, the Moyers special is expected to re-energize

veteran

> health activists and medical professionals in their fight against a

growing

> problem -- unregulated and untested chemicals flooding the commercial

market

> place. This public heat, coupled with a burgeoning grassroots resistance

to

> chemical producers, may set the industry on the defensive like never

before

> ... but that's getting ahead of the story.

>

>

> Legal Battle in the Bayou

>

>

> Elaine Ross's husband, Dan, spent 23 years working at the Conoco (later

> Vista) chemical plant in Lake , Louisiana. After being diagnosed

with

> brain cancer, according to Jim of the Houston Chronicle, " Dan Ross

> came to believe that he had struck a terrible bargain, forfeiting perhaps

30

> years of his life through his willingness to work with vinyl chloride,

used

> to make one of the world's most common plastics. "

>

>

> " Just before he died [in 1990] he said, 'Mama, they killed me,' " recalled

> Elaine. " I promised him I would never let Vista or the chemical industry

> forget who he was. "

>

>

> And she hasn't. She teamed up with Baggett to file a wrongful death

> suit against Vista. Baggett won a multimillion-dollar settlement for Ross

in

> 1994, but she wasn't satisfied with just the money. She knew that her

> husband's death wasn't an isolated incident -- that many other chemical

> plant workers were dead, dying or sick because their employers weren't

> telling them about potential health hazards. And Vista certainly wasn't

the

> only culprit.

>

>

> So Ross told Baggett to take the fight to the next level. Baggett did,

suing

> 30 companies and trade associations including the Chemical Manufacturers

> Association (now called the American Chemistry Council) for conspiracy,

> alleging that they hid and suppressed evidence of vinyl chloride-related

> deaths and diseases.

>

>

> As a result of the litigation brought on Ross's behalf, Baggett has been

> able to obtain what he says is more than a million previously secret

> industry documents over the past decade. These " Chemical Papers, " as they

> are becoming known, chronicled virtually the entire history of the

chemical

> industry, much of it related to vinyl chloride -- minutes of board

meetings,

> minutes of committee meetings, consultant reports, and on and on.

>

>

> According to Jim of the Chronicle, the documents suggested that

major

> chemical manufacturers closed ranks in the late 1950s to contain and

> counteract evidence of vinyl chloride's toxic effects. " They depict a

> framework of dubious science and painstaking public relations, coordinated

> by the industry's main trade association with two dominant themes: Avoid

> disclosure and deny liability. " The chemical companies were hiding the

fact

> that they had " subjected at least two generations of workers to excessive

> levels of a potent carcinogen that targets the liver, brain, lungs and

> blood-forming organs. "

>

>

> " Even though they (the chemical companies) may be competitive in some

> spheres, in others they aren't, " Baggett told . " They have a mutual

> interest in their own employees not knowing (about health effects), in

their

> customers not knowing, in the government not knowing. "

>

>

> " There was a concerted effort to hide this material, " said Dr.

Rosner,

> a professor of public health and history at Columbia University who has

> reviewed many of the documents as part of a research project. " It's clear

> there was chicanery. "

>

>

> And while the documents show that the industry freely shared health

> information among themselves, " the companies were evasive with their own

> employees and the government, " wrote . " They were unwilling to

disrupt

> the growing market for polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, used in

everything

> from pipe to garden hoses. " The whole case and others like it " accentuate

> the problem of occupational cancer, which, by some estimates, takes more

> lives (50,000) each year than AIDS, homicide or suicide, but receives far

> less attention. "

>

>

> " What I hope to achieve, through , is that every man who works in a

> chemical plant is told the truth and tested on a regular basis in the

proper

> manner, " Elaine Ross told the Chronicle. " I want the chemical companies to

> be accountable for every little detail that they don't tell these men. "

>

>

> In a prepared statement, the Chemical Manufacturers Association called

such

> charges " irresponsible. " The group said that it promotes a policy of

> openness among its members.

>

>

> From Courtroom to Television Set

>

>

> Award-winning TV producer Sherry , who got access to the treasure

trove

> of chemical company archives, started deeply probing the industry and its

> secret ways. She brought her findings to Bill Moyers, with whom she had

> previously worked.

>

>

> Moyers agreed that the story needed to be told. The result of their

> collaboration is " Trade Secrets, " the 90 minute special that will be

> followed by a 30 minute roundtable discussion among industry

representatives

> and advocates for public health and environmental justice. Coming as it

does

> on Monday night, March 26 -- the night after the Academy Awards, where

> may very well receive an for her portrayal of

> Brockovich -- this one-two punch of mass audience attention could deal the

> chemical industry quite a blow.

>

>

> Meanwhile, the U.S. Center for Disease Control has released its " National

> Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals " (available at

> www.cdc.gov/nceh/dls/report). The report, based on new technology that

> measures chemcials directly in blood and urine, has found a wide range of

> dangerous chemcials present in most humans.

>

>

>

>

>

> Citizen activists and health experts have been fighting for decades to

> protect their families from untested and unsafe synthetic chemicals. It

has

> been a difficult battle, due in part to public misconceptions. Almost 80

> percent of Americans think that the government tests chemicals for safety,

> which is untrue. Aside from chemicals directly added to food or drugs,

there

> are no health and safety studies required before a chemical is

manufactured,

> sold or used in commercial or retail products. The same is true for

cosmetic

> products and the chemicals in them.

>

>

> So if the government isn't regulating chemical safety, who is?

> Unfortunately, the chemical industry itself.

>

>

> As health advocates have long complained, this self-regulation simply

isn't

> enough. " For the most part, we rely on chemical companies to vouch for the

> safety of their products, " says public health advocate Charlotte Brody, a

> former nurse. " That's like relying on the tobacco industry to assess the

> risk of tobacco. "

>

>

> Take the case of Dursban, Dow Chemical's indoor insecticide product. Even

> after 276 people filed lawsuits claiming that they were poisoned by

Dursban,

> Dow didn't reveal information about the product that proved its toxicity.

> When the truth finally came out in 1996, the company was fined a miniscule

> $740,000 by the Feds for withholding information from public officials.

>

>

> Critics have long said that strong government regulations would have

> prevented such fiascoes, and with " Trade Secrets " and the Chemical Papers

as

> ammunition, they may be closer to getting their wish than ever before.

>

>

> Taking the Chemical Industry to Task

>

>

> Using the Moyers special as a rallying point, a coalition of grassroots

> groups called " Coming Clean " has bonded together to oppose the chemical

> industry. In early March, dozens of national leaders -- health

> professionals, scientists, activists and media experts -- gathered for a

> weekend retreat in Northern Virginia to plan the elements of this

long-term

> assault. Charlotte Brody, currently Coming Clean's head organizer,

expressed

> the anger and outrage behind the meeting.

>

>

> " For decades, chemical companies kept secret the hazards of chemicals they

> produce, " Brody said. " These chemicals are in our food, our water, the air

> we breathe. Now, they're in all of us. Every child on earth is born with

> these synthetic chemicals in their bodies, and only a small percentage of

> these chemicals have been adequately tested. "

>

>

> Dr. Mark , a physician from Hartford, Connecticut and one of the

> leaders of the national effort, insisted that to protect ourselves and our

> children from the harm of toxic chemicals, " We must phase out all

dangerous

> chemicals over the next 10 years, beginning with those for which there are

> safer alternatives. And we must stop making the same mistakes, by

> prohibiting the introduction of any new chemicals that pose a threat to

our

> health and our children's health. There also needs to be government action

> to insure the right to know about toxic chemicals, production, use and

test

> results. "

>

>

> As a first step, Coming Clean plans to engage the public with the message

of

> " Trade Secrets. " All across the country, thousands of events and viewing

> parties are being organized, timed to coincide with the Moyers show. The

> events harken back to the campaign surrounding the 1980s nuclear holocaust

> film, " The Day After, " which galvanized a vanguard of anti-nuke activists

to

> oppose the arms race.

>

>

> " The local viewing parties will give people a chance to talk about the

film

> after they see it, " says Malkan, Coming Clean's media coordinator.

> " Rather than going to bed angry, they can discuss the issues with other

> concerned neighbors, and then channel their outrage and ideas into

powerful

> grassroots coalitions. "

>

>

> Momentum around the Moyers special seems to be picking up. The Whole Foods

> supermarket chain has agreed to carry Coming Clean's flyers in every one

of

> their stores, and many email listservs, chat rooms and message boards are

> buzzing about the March 26 show.

>

>

> While most viewings will happen in private homes, activists in dozens of

> cities -- from Anchorage to Austin to Biddeford, Maine -- are holding

public

> viewing events. In Ann Arbor, for example, a public viewing will be held

in

> an organic brew pub. In Buffalo, New York, environmental and labor leaders

> will stage a public showing, and will use it as an opportunity to

recognize

> three local whistle blowers battling pollution and environmental

injustice.

> And in San Francisco, where breast cancer rates are among the highest in

the

> country, Mayor Willie Brown, Representative Pelosi and Senator

Barbara

> Boxer will all watch the show at the public library.

>

>

> Eventually, the coalition hopes to harness the public outcry to push for

> government regulations and class action suits against the chemical giants.

> Some organizers are hoping that Congress finally wakes up and focuses a

> spotlight on the chemical industry, while others are calling for corporate

> accountability.

>

>

> " The American people deserve to know what chemical executives knew and

when

> they knew it, " said Cohen, a leader of the Boston-based Environmental

> Health Fund and co-coordinator of the group Health Care Without Harm.

>

>

> The Chemical Industry Backlash

>

>

> In all likelihood, the chemical industry will trudge out familiar

responses

> to " Trade Secrets. " They will bring in experts to argue the scientific

> validity of chemical poisoning. They will say, for example, that doses are

> so low that animals would have to drink 50,000 bathtubs of contaminated

> water to suffer any harm. But health professionals counter that small

doses

> can have measurable impact in humans, and that people are often more

> sensitive to toxic substances than test animals. Furthermore, no tests

have

> been done on the cumulative, long term effects of small doses.

>

>

> The industry also likes to tell the public that it has changed since the

> 50's, 60's and '70s, when chemical companies stonewalled every request for

> information or hint of danger. Of course, major incidents like the debacle

> over Dursban undermine that claim. Thus, despite millions of dollars of

> effort over the years, the public ranks the industry next to last in terms

> of public confidence (trailing only the tobacco industry).

>

>

> So the chemical industry has essentially abandoned it's efforts to change

> public opinion. As in most industries with health and safety issues, the

> chemical giants focus instead directly on Congress, where lobbying and

> campaign contributions are often more effective ways to wage their battle.

> Their goal is a simple one: to make sure that no laws would ever require

> them to perform health and safety testing for the compounds they produce.

>

>

> Needless to say, they have been totally successful thus far. But the time

> may be ripe for change. Polls show public sentiment is increasingly

> anti-corporate. According to a recent Business Week poll, 82 percent of

the

> public feels that corporations wield too much power. According to a recent

> Roper poll, half the population feels that environmental regulations

haven't

> gone far enough.

>

>

> With the chemical industry at the bottom of the public's " good corporate

> citizen " list, a critical mass of citizens may soon come together to fight

> back.

>

>