|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Documentary exposes workplace, environmental poisoning
PBS TV's "Trade Secrets: A Moyers Report"
By Kate Randall
6 April 2001
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email
Trade Secrets: A Moyers Report, hosted by journalist
Bill Moyers, was aired March 26 by the Public Broadcasting System
(PBS). Through an examination of recently released chemical industry
documents and interviews with medical experts and chemical plant
workers, the program exposed the anti-social practices of the
US chemical industry over the past half century. It documented
the systematic effort by the industry to conceal the toxic effect
of many of its products from its workforce as well as the general
public.
The majority of the synthetic chemicals used in US manufacturing
today were only developed in the second half of the twentieth
century. Technological developments during the Second World War
led to a boom in the petrochemical and synthetic chemical industries,
including the development of plastics. Literally thousands of
new chemical substances were developed, with little or no testing
done to determine their safety for the workers producing them,
residents nearby the factories, or consumers. It has been subsequently
determined that some of these chemicals pose severe health risks.
The 90-minute PBS documentary dealt in particular with the
toxic effects of vinyl chloride, benzene and DBCP. Vinyl chloride,
used widely in plastics manufacturing, causes liver damage. It
has been proven to cause angiosarcoma, a rare form of liver cancer,
among workers exposed to even low levels of the substance. It
has also been linked to other forms of cancer. Benzene, a clear,
colorless liquid most widely used as a solvent in the rubber industry
and the production of gasoline, has been proven to cause leukemia.
The pesticide DBCP is known to cause sterility and testicular
atrophy among male workers exposed to the chemical.
Trade Secrets centers around internal chemical
industry documents revealing that management was in many cases
aware of the health dangers these substances posed to their workforces,
but withheld the information. Much of this previously confidential
information became available as a result of a lawsuit by a worker,
Dan Ross, against the oil giant Conoco, where he was employed
for 23 years. The plant where Ross worked produces the raw vinyl
chloride that is key to the manufacture of PVC plastic, a widely
used and lucrative product for the chemical industry.
Conoco is one of a number of companies in Texas and Louisiana
along a 300-mile stretch of the Gulf of Mexico coast that houses
the largest collection of petrochemical refineries and factories
in the world. Workers and nearby residents refer to the area as
Cancer Alley.
Dan Ross began working at Conoco in 1967. For the next 23 years
he was exposed every workday to vinyl chloride. Workers at his
plantand thousands of other chemical workerswere repeatedly
assured that exposure to the chemical posed no health risks. But,
as has become clear through an examination of company memoranda
and documents, the industry was aware of immense health dangers,
but took no action to inform the workforce or the American public.
Dan Ross's wife, Elaine, explains, Not one day was he
not exposed. As the years went by, you could see it on his face.
He started to get this hollow look under his eyes, and he always
smelled. I could always smell the chemicals on him. I could even
smell it on his breath after a while. But even up until he was
diagnosed the first time, he said, They'll take care of
me. They're my friends.'
In the spring of 1989, Dan Ross was diagnosed with a rare form
of brain cancer, and on October 9, 1990 he died at the age of
46. But before Dan Ross succumbed, Elaine Ross took it upon herself
to investigate what had caused her husband's death.
As she says in the PBS program, I was just going through
some of his papers, and I found this exposure record. It tells
you what the amount was that he was exposed to in any given day.
Bill Moyers asks her: Somebody's written on here, exceeds
short-term exposure.' What does that mean?
Ross: That it was over the acceptable limit that the
government allows. So this exceeded what he should have been exposed
to that day.
But Ross also found a notation reading: Do not include
on wire to Houston. In other words, the company was covering
up the fatal poisoning of her husband. This revelation led Dan
and Elaine Ross to initiate a legal battle that included charges
of conspiracy against the companies producing vinyl chloride.
Attorney William Baggett, Jr. waged a 10-year legal battle
on behalf of the Rosses that led to the uncovering of more than
a million pages of chemical company documents, which in turn formed
the basis of the PBS documentary. Gerald Markowitz and David Rosner,
historians of public health in New York, were also retained by
two law firms to study the Ross archive.
Trade Secrets also investigated the case of Bernard
Skaggs, who began working in 1955 for the B.F. Goodrich company
in Louisville, Kentucky. At the plant where Skaggs worked, vinyl
chloride was turned into a dough-like mixture that was then dried
and processed into the raw material for PVC plastic. Skaggs' job
was to climb into the giant vats that mixed the vinyl chloride
and chip off what was left behindwhat the workers called
kettle crud.
One of B.F. Goodrich's internal documents from May 1959 to
the director of the company's Department of Industrial Hygiene
reads:
We have been investigating vinyl chloride a bit.... We
feel quite confident that 500 parts per million is going to produce
rather appreciable injury when inhaled 7 hours a day, five days
a week for an extended period.
Another memo from B.F Goodrich to Union Carbide, Imperial Chemical
Industries and the Monsanto Company reads: Gentlemen: There
is no question that skin lesions, absorption of bone of the terminal
joints of the hands, and circulatory changes can occur in workers
associated with the polymerization of PVC.
However, the employees of these companies were never informed
of the dangers of working with this chemical. Bernard Skaggs described
his work experience at B.F. Goodrich as follows: There was
vinyl chloride everywhere. The valve, overhead valves over there
where the vinyl chloride was pumped into the reactors. All of
those leaked and dripped. Most of them dripped on the floor all
the time. They said it had to be ... 1,500 parts per million before
you could smell it. Not only could you smell it ... it would get
into a vapor, and through the sunlight it waves.... It was all
the time that way.
My hands began to get sore, and they began to swell some.
My fingers got so sore on the ends, I couldn't button a shirt,
couldn't dial a phone. And I had thick skin like it was burned
all over the back of my hand, back of my fingers, all the way
up my arm, almost to my armpit. And after enough time, I got thick
places on my face right under my eyes.
Skaggs finally had his fingers x-rayed and was shocked to discover
that the bones in his fingers were dissolving. But as horrendous
as this discovery was, B.F. Goodrich suspected that vinyl chloride
posed an even greater threat to its workforce.
By October 1966, medical consultants advising the company wrote
that the danger posed by the chemical may be a systemic
disease as opposed to a purely localized disease (fingers)....
They (Goodrich) are worried about possible long term effect on
body tissue especially if it proves to be systemic.
According to Trade Secrets, although Goodrich executives
did inform other companies of the toxic effects of the chemical,
they sought to keep this information from their workforce and
the public. A Goodrich memo to other chemical companies read:
They hope all will use discretion in making the problem
public.... They particularly want to avoid exposés like
Silent Spring. ( Silent Spring was the groundbreaking
book by Rachel Carson, published in 1962, which exposed the role
of chemical pollutants such as the pesticide DDT in the poisoning
of the environment.)
In the documentary, Professor Gerald Markowitz from John Jay
College in New York comments: They [Goodrich] understand
the implications of what is before them and they are faced with
a situation that could explode at any minute.... Politically,
culturally, economicallythis could affect their whole industry
if people feel that this plastic could represent a real hazard
to the workforce, and if it could present a hazard to the workforce,
people are going to wonder, consumers are going to wonder what
is the impact that it could have for me.
On April 30, 1969, members of the chemical industry's trade
association met in Washington. They received a report from a group
of medical researchers who recommended that exposure to vinyl
chloride be reduced from 500 parts per million to 50 parts. The
industry group voted to reject the advisers' recommendations.
Medical evidence continued to mount that vinyl chloride posed
severe health risks. In the early 1970s, Dr. P.L. Viola, a scientist
at an Italian plant, exposed rats to vinyl chloride and discovered
cancer in the laboratory animals, even as the exposure level was
steadily lowered. Another Italian researcher, Dr. Cesare Maltoni,
found evidence of angiosarcoma from exposure to the chemical.
In studies sponsored by the European chemical industry, cancer
appeared in rats exposed to levels of vinyl chloride common on
factory floors in the US.
The chemical industry's response to this mounting scientific
evidence was to move even more deliberately to keep it under wraps.
Representatives from both European and American chemical companies
signed an agreement to keep the information secret from everyone
outside the industry. Companies signing the secrecy agreement
included: Conoco, B.F. Goodrich, Dow, Shell, Ethyl Corporation
and Union Carbide.
In 1973, when chemical industry representatives addressed the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH),
a new government agency, on the safety of vinyl chloride, they
made no mention of Dr. Maltoni's research. Subsequently, NIOSH
made no recommendations on use of the chemical. According to internal
correspondence at Union Carbide: NIOSH did not appear to
want to alienate a cooperative industry.
In 1974, B.F. Goodrich announced that four workers at its Louisville,
Kentucky vinyl chloride plant had died from angiosarcoma, the
liver cancer detected in Dr. Maltoni's study. Two hundred seventy
workers at the plant were tested, and blood abnormalities showed
up in fifty-five of them. Nine months later, the federal government
finally ordered workplace exposure to vinyl chloride reduced to
one part per million, despite objections from the chemical industry.
Chemical workers were not the only ones exposed to the dangers
of vinyl chloride. Beginning in the late 1960s, the chemical was
used as the propellant in a wide array of consumer products. Aerosol-propelled
hairspray was aggressively marketed to women. According to Trade
Secrets: In beauty parlors across America, hairdressers
and their customers were using new aerosol sprays. No one told
them they were inhaling toxic gas at exposure levels much higher
than on the factory floor.
Fearing costly lawsuits over the health dangers of vinyl chloride,
companies slowly began to withdraw these products from the market.
Trade Secrets commented: Some companies would
give up the aerosol businessbut quietly. No public warning
was issued. Now, 30 years later, those hairdressers and their
customers are unaware of the risks to which they were exposed.
And it is impossible to know how many women may have been sick
or diedwithout knowing why. There has never been a
study to calculate the impact of vinyl chloride products on hairdressers
or the consuming public.
Trade Secrets also examined the connection between
leukemia and benzene. An internal memo from Esso Oil's medical
research division reads: Most authorities agree the only
level which can be considered absolutely safe for prolonged exposure
is zero. But when the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) proposed that workplace exposure be lowered to one part
per million, the chemical industry funded a $500,000 Benzene
Program Panel to fight the regulation.
It would take almost a decade before regulations on benzene
exposure were finally instituted. According to Dr. Philip Landrigan,
chairman of Preventative Medicine at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine
in New York, 492 workersin rubber plants, oil refineries
and other industrieseventually died from exposure to benzene
during this 10-year period.
The chemical companies also fought against the imposition of
restrictions on the manufacture of DBCP, a pesticide produced
by Dow, Occidental and Shell. An internal and confidential
report on DBCP from the Dow Chemical Company Biochemical Research
Laboratory dated July 23, 1958 reads: Testicular atrophy
may result from prolonged repeated exposure. A tentative hygiene
standard of 1 part per million is suggested. However, Dow
did not reduce exposures to the chemical, and many workers became
sterile as a result.
An inter-office memo written by an engineer at Occidental on
the impact of DBCP reads: We are slowly contaminating all
wells in our area and two of our own wells are contaminated to
the point of being toxic to animals or humans. THIS IS A TIME
BOMB THAT WE MUST DE-FUSE. Despite this knowledge, the companies
kept the pesticide on the market for eight more years.
The chemical industry has expended millions of dollars to fight
regulations on the manufacture of its products. The industry contributed
over $6 million dollars to more than 200 political action committees
to back Ronald Reaganthe petrochemical favoritein
his 1980 presidential bid. Within a month of assuming office in
1981, Reagan signed an executive order transforming the battle
over chemical safety.
Reagan directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
delay proposing or finalizing any regulations on the chemical
industry until it could be proven that they were cost-effective.
In other words, the EPAinstead of being a watchdog organization
to protect workers, the general public and the environment from
the dangers of toxic substanceswas more and more transformed
into an agency that calculates the minimum number of workers who
can be poisoned and killed while still allowing the companies
to turn a profit.
Over the last two decades, chemical companies have spent millions
of dollars to thwart the implementation of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) and the EPA agency it established to regulate
toxic chemicals. Trade Secrets referred to the case
of the class of chemicals known as phthalates, which are widely
used in such products as shower curtains and children's toys.
As early as 1980 the National Cancer Institute had determined
that one phthalate, DEHP, causes cancer in animals. The EPA held
numerous meetings with chemical industry representatives and their
attorneys, but to date the agency has taken no action to either
ban or limit the use of phthalates.
Of the 80,000 man-made chemicals that have been registered
with the EPA for possible manufacturing use, some 15,000 are actually
produced each year in major quantities. Only about 43 percent
of these have ever been tested for their effects on humans. Nearly
25 years after TSCA was enacted, only five types of chemicals
have been banned by law.
By the chemical industry's own admission, very little is known
about the majority of chemical substances with which workers and
consumers come into contact on a daily basis. However, Trade
Secrets concludes by pointing out alarming data available
about the health of Americans:
What we do know is that breast cancer has risen steadily
over the last four decades. Forty thousand women will die of it
in this year alone.
We do know brain cancer among children is up by 26 percent.
We know testicular cancer among older teenage boys has almost
doubled, that infertility among young adults is up, and so are
learning disabilities in children...
So we are flying blind. Except the laboratory mice in
this vast chemical experiment are the children.
* * *
Following the documentary, chemical industry representatives
were invited to join in a half-hour panel discussion. Joining
Bill Moyers were Terry Yosie, vice president of the American Chemistry
Council, and Ted Voorhees, an attorney representing the Chemical
Trade Association in the Dan Ross case. Also on hand were Ken
Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group (a Washington,
DC-based research group that lobbies Congress and government agencies
on issues of workplace safety and environmental issues), and Dr.
Philip Landrigan of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine.
Industry spokesman Terry Yosie began by criticizing Trade
Secrets, claiming it presented a biased view of the chemical
companies. He did not, however, dispute the validity of any of
the documentary evidence presented in the program, the bulk of
which came from the internal records of the companies themselves.
While Yosie claimed the chemical industry conducts thorough
testing of its products to determine their safety for workers
and the public, he had no comment when Ken Cook pointed out that
the legislation mandating such tests had been consistently opposed
by the chemical companies.
Attorney Ted Voorhees could not explain whydespite the
fact that B.F. Goodrich knew the damage in Bernie Skaggs' hands
was due to vinyl chloride exposurethe company never provided
the worker with this information. Voorhees made the absurd claim
that the company in 1967 made a full public disclosure in the
form of an article about the health dangers of the chemical published
by a doctor on its payroll in the Journal of the American Medical
Association. Skaggs' doctor should have read the article and
informed his patient, Voorhees said.
Moyers repeatedly pressed Voorhees over the fact that B.F.
Goodrich never informed Bernie Skaggs or its workforce as a whole
about the health dangers from vinyl chloride, a charge which the
corporate attorney could not refute.
Dr. Landrigan said that in addition to independent testing
of chemicals, the most important way to guard against the chemical
poisoning of the population was for the chemical industry, environmental
groups and the academic community to work together to support
a national right-to-know initiative.
Trade Secrets presented a powerful indictment of
the US chemical industry and made a strong case for the need for
strict, independent testing of industrial chemicals and full disclosure
of the results of these tests to workers and the general public.
Documents from the chemical companies' own files reveal that time
and again, despite knowledge that they were exposing their workers
and consumers to health risks, they did nothing to alter their
practices until compelled to do so.
However, Trade Secrets never probed the underlying
reasons for the chemical industry's five-decade-long campaign
to keep the truth from its workers and the publica practice
that continues to this day. In the final analysis, this question
cannot be answered simply by pointing to the subjective motives
of industry executives.
No doubt, many of the practices of these individuals are reprehensible
and in some cases arguably criminal. But this conduct is promoted
by a social system that puts the material interests of company
executives and big shareholders above the social interests of
the broad masses of people, as well as the health of the environment.
The willful chemical contamination of workers and consumers and
the injection of toxins into the water and air are justified on
the basis of the supreme right of these companies to make a profit,
and the concealment of this poisoning is rationalized in the name
of business secrets.
This conduct on the part of the US chemical industrywhich
is supported by the bulk of the political establishment and is
rarely challenged in the mediais one of the clearest demonstrations
of the socially destructive implications of a society organized
according to the principle of private ownership of the means of
production and the subordination of all social questions to the
private accumulation of wealth. It exposes the stunted nature
of democracy in America, where multibillion-dollar companies have
the democratic right to poison and kill thousands
of citizens.
Workers and the general public have a basic right to know whether
the chemical substances being produced in factories are safe.
At the very least, strict and ruthlessly enforced regulations
need to be imposed across the entire chemical industry. As Trade
Secrets demonstrated, business cannot be relied upon to
conduct its own studies and make its own disclosures.
But research into the consequences of chemical production on
human life and the environment can only be truly independent
if working people as a whole have democratic control over these
industries. Ultimately, this poses a fundamental change in property
relations, in which the major levers of the economy, such as the
petrochemical monopolies, are transformed into public utilities
and placed under the democratic control of the working population.
Such a socialist organization of society will be based on the
interests of the vast majority of the people, rather than a small
and privileged minority.
To its credit, Trade Secrets exposed how the chemical
industry over the past 50 years has placed the lives and health
of millions of peopleas well as the environmentat
risk. The question posed by the programand left largely
unansweredis what political perspective needs to be adopted
by working people to counteract these socially destructive practices.
The 40,000 pages of chemical industry and other documents
referred to in Trade Secrets: A Moyers Report are
published in full on the web site of the Environmental Working
Group at: www.ewg.org.
See Also:
US chemical pollution
threatens child health and development
[6 October 2000]
Alcoa Australia admits
cancer dangers
[15 January 2000]
US study establishes
link between dioxin and cancer
[1 June 1999]
Cancer and social life
Review of Living Downstream: An Ecologist Looks at Cancer and
the Environment, by Sandra Steingraber
[13 May 1999]
Wollongong steelworks
pumps out dangerous dioxins
Report confirms Workers Inquiry findings
[10 February 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |