‘I LIED ABOUT TOXIC CHEMICALS for Exxon, DuPont, and Their Lobbyists’

[Segami]

By David Heath, Center for Public Integrity


The chemical industry’s powerful trade group, the American Chemistry Council, has long maintained that it had nothing to do with an enormously successful but deceitful lobbying effort in state capitals to defend the use of potentially ineffective and toxic flame retardants in furniture. Now, in a rare breaking of ranks, a top industry consultant is discrediting that story—and in so doing providing a window into the shadowy world of corporate advocacy and its use of front groups that aren’t what they appear. After a Chicago Tribune investigation in 2012 exposed Citizens for Fire Safety as an industry group masquerading as a coalition of firefighters, educators, community activists, doctors and others, the chemistry council disavowed any affiliation with or support for the group. The political consultant who ran Citizens for Fire Safety, however, says the council lied about its involvement. Grant David Gillham said the ACC helped create Citizens for Fire Safety and frequently coordinated with his organization. “They flat out lied about it,” Gillham said in a recent interview. “They denied that they ever did anything with us.”


The American Chemistry Council—whose 153 members include powerhouses such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, Dow Chemical, and DuPont—stands behind the accuracy of a past statement made by its president and chief executive officer, Cal Dooley, about having no affiliation with Citizens for Fire Safety. Now, however, the council acknowledges for the first time that it engaged in discussions and coordination with the group. The council’s credibility is crucial as it currently works with a bipartisan group in the Senate to rewrite the law governing the regulation of toxic chemicals. The bill to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act passed a Senate committee recently by a vote of 15 to 5 and last week picked up 14 new senators as co-sponsors, virtually assuring it can pass the Senate. Still, nearly every major environmental group opposes it, in part because the American Chemistry Council supports it. “This is an industry that lies,” said Ken Cook, president and co-founder of the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization. “I think at this point anybody would be foolish to believe them when they say they are serious about reining in the abuses that they’ve committed.”


Cook said he believes the American Chemistry Council wants Congress to gut the power of states to regulate toxic chemicals and give all control to an easily manipulated Environmental Protection Agency. It was states such as California, Maine and Washington—as opposed to the EPA—that took action to curb the use of flame retardants. Virtually all Americans are exposed to the chemicals, which float as dust particles from seat cushions in a typical home. Yet scientific research has linked some of these chemicals to health problems such as diabetes, IQ deficits, fertility problems and cancer. Some scientists have also questioned whether flame retardants provide any significant benefit in protecting people from fire. The American Chemistry Council says that the EPA “has identified approximately 50 flame retardants that it says are unlikely to pose a risk to human health.” It says flame retardants “can help save lives.” In June 2007, a bill banning some forms of flame retardants passed the California State Assembly and was sailing through state Senate committees. At that point, three flame-retardant manufacturers decided to form Citizens for Fire Safety. Those companies were Albemarle Corp., Chemtura Corp. and ICL Industrial Products. The new group quickly flooded the state with television and radio ads. Gillham says it spent $22 million in 2007 alone to defeat the California bill.


California state Sen. Mark Leno, a Democrat from San Francisco, said the group used questionable tactics such as having burn victims and children give emotionally wrenching testimony even though they had no knowledge of flame retardants. It also paid $240,000 in 2010 through 2011 to Seattle burn surgeon David Heimbach, who the Tribune reported gave false testimony about babies killed in fires because of the lack of flame retardants. The newspaper found that the babies Heimbach identified didn’t exist, a finding verified by Washington state’s Medical Quality Assurance Commission. “I can’t say that I’ve seen in my 13 years in Sacramento anything as crass and as insensitive,” Leno said in a recent interview. After Citizens for Fire Safety was discredited in 2012, current and former lawmakers in Maine asked the American Chemistry Council’s leader to expel the three flame retardant companies behind the group for engaging in unethical tactics. The council’s Dooley wrote back on June 5, 2012, denying any involvement with Citizens for Fire Safety. “ACC is not affiliated with Citizens for Fire Safety, and neither ACC staff nor resources were used to support activities undertaken by the group,” he wrote.






cont'

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/13/i-lied-about-toxic-chemicals-for-exxon-dupont-and-their-lobbyists.html

[TheSarcastinator]

1. thanks for the post, great article

I hope it is widely read.

[Overseas]

2. K&R.

[Octafish]

3. So that's what happened to $cience!

Ju$tice, too.

Trade Secrets: Chemical Body Burden

As part of a study of pollutant loads in the human body sponsored by the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, samples of Bill Moyers' blood and urine were analyzed. Eighty-four distinct chemicals were found.

[Ichingcarpenter]

4. Interesting.....I notice that Bill Moyers never won a Presidential Freedom medal

just for educating the public. But Bush was given a 'freedom' medal by Obama.

His interviews with Joseph Campbell really got me started and are worth the time plus his 'secret government documentary

Watch excerpts from all six episodes of The Power of Myth, the beloved 1988 PBS series featuring mythologist and storyteller Joseph Campbell and Bill Moyers. Together, they explore the powerful influence of enduring myths on the choices we make and the ways we live.


http://billmoyers.com/spotlight/download-joseph-campbell-and-the-power-of-myth-audio/


I didn't know Bill did this too.

[Octafish]

5. Notice, too, how chemical companies aren't getting sued over the health impacts of their products.

While PBS ran Moyer's report, it's telling how Corporate McPravda has missed the story. Even National Geographic, which ran a piece in 2006, dropped it like a hot potato, not that Rupert Murdoch buying in, ca. 2012, had anything to do with it. Cough.

[Duppers]

21. yep

67% of Nat Geo! Cough cough.


And I'm surprised that PBS still carried Bill Moyers after accepting so much Koch money.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. Funny you should mention that--

I'm just now reading Robert A. Segal's Joseph Campbell: An Introduction (1990 Paperback Ed.).

I started a little discussion of myth, archetypes, etc. in the Bernie group a few days ago. It seems to have dropped out of sight by now.

Anyway, I've been thinking a lot about archetypal images and how Reagan & BushII followed the imagery (but of course not the substance of) of Teddy Roosevelt in taking on the trappings of the "cowboy face" of the Hero with a Thousand Faces.

We need to get people to associate Bernie with Gandalf or Obi Wan Kenobi or something.

American "scientific" psychology has paid little attention to Jung or, for that matter, Assagioli, so there was none of this stuff in my formal training. I've become aware of the deficiency and have been trying to make up for that in recent years.

[closeupready]

8. If you enjoy language and symbolism, ... DAMN

I can not for the life of me remember his name now, so ashamed.

I was going to suggest the work of that guy from MIT - he's ethnically Jewish, liberal, and a professor emeritus, IIRC, occasionally speaks about the mass media, Israel, and other current events. He's kind of an academic Bernie Sanders, quite up there now...

Not Linus Pauling, but dammit, why can't I remember his name...? His works are kind of deep, but if you get into that subject matter, they are FASCINATING reads. I lived and breathed his books way long ago in college.

On edit - NOAM CHOMSKY.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. I'm familiar with him.

I happened to be in grad school at about the time psycholinguistics was making a big splash in the world of mind theory, and the "new wave" was pretty much based on Chomsky's theories of language--"deep grammar" and all that. He was already becoming a major force in the antiwar movement in those days. He was something of a hero and model to us. The biggest name in linguistic theory, he would refuse to speak about his theoretical work in any academic settings unless they also guaranteed him an opportunity to speak about the Vietnam War. I've subsequently followed his more political work in books like Manufacturing Consent and subsequent writings.

[Octafish]

15. The APA does pay attention to CIA

Reaganomics.

Is Everything for Sale?

The Ethical Demise of the American Psychological Association

by GEOFF GRAY
CounterPunch, May 13, 2015

The conscience of the American Psychological Association (APA) is slowly dying as it facilitates torture, cheats its own members, and hussles junk science boondoggles to the defense industry. But the APA wasn’t always this way. Founded in the late 19th century by the intellectual giant William James and others, it had a proud history of advancing the science of psychology, defending the rights of those served by psychology, and promoting the interests of its members.

SNIP...

So what about the integrity of psychological science and services? More spin, deception, and bullshit as the APA shills behavioral programs to the military-security state. Building on relationships developed while crafting torture policies, APA and APA connected psychologists have spun off a series of ventures noteworthy for their pseudoscientific underpinnings, lack of real world effectiveness and high cost. Some of the programs the APA has sponsored, abetted or profited from include:

Comprehensive Soldier Resiliency Program (237 million dollars) was developed by Martin Seligman and is now deployed throughout the military . This program aims to prevent stress-related mental health problems by teaching soldiers to be more resilient and optimistic. The APA enthusiastically promoted the program in a slew of puff pieces in its peer reviewed flagship journal, the American Psychologist. But independent evaluations show the program doesn’t work. An Institute of Medicine scientific panel noted that the program was never vetted for effectiveness and could, in fact be harmful. USA Today article cites “startling negative results.”(6) When USA Today confronted the Army, military psychologists went back and lowered the threshold for optimism to make the results look less bad.

Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (81 million). Two psychologists, James Elmer Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, created interrogation techniques using principals developed by the same Martin Seligman. However, this program has not only failed to elicit useful information via torture, it has blackened America’s name around the world and contributed to Middle East instability and blowback.

Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques, SPOT (900 million dollars). Developed by psychologist Paul Ekman, the program trains “behavior detection officers” to identify potential threats at US airports based on personal characteristics, behavior and facial expressions. To date there has not been one verified case of a successful terrorist detection using the program.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/05/13/the-ethical-demise-of-the-american-psychological-association/

Who benefits, Jacky?

[Jackpine Radical]

16. Actually, this stuff has gotten a lot of coverage on the professional listservs.

I've posted some of it here myself. Among the professionals I routinely associate with online & in RL, I have not met a single one who defends the APA. Most of this crap happened without the knowledge, and certainly without the consent, of the rank & file membership. People are resigning in rather large numbers.

Here, from 2008, is a letter from one prominent psychologist. Things have only gotten worse since then.

By way of full disclosure, I am still a member because, not having an academic appointment, I need access to the journals that I can't get without membership. I will probably leave as soon as that practical need no is no longer relevant.

Why I Resigned from the
American Psychological Association
Kenneth S. Pope, Ph.D. , ABPP

The following letter was sent to APA President Alan Kazdin via FedEx on February 6, 2008, and to members of the APA Council of Representatives via the Council listserv Thursday morning, February 7:

Alan E. Kazdin, Ph.D.
President,
American Psychological Association
750 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002-4242

Dear Alan,

With sadness I write to resign from the American Psychological Association. My respect and affection for the members, along with my 29 year history with APA, make this a hard and reluctant step. Chairing the Ethics Committee, holding fellow status in 9 divisions, and receiving the APA Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public Service, the Division 12 Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Clinical Psychology, and the Division 42 Award for Mentoring reflect a few chapters in my APA history.

I respectfully disagree with decisive changes that APA has made in its ethical stance during the past 6+ years. These changes moved APA far from its ethical foundation, historic traditions, and basic values, and beyond what I can in good conscience support with my membership.

I would like to note two examples of disagreement. First, the years since 9-11 brought concern over psychologists' work that affects detainees. APA has stressed psychologists' "vital role" regarding "the use of ethical interrogations to safeguard the welfare of detainees" and ways that psychologists "help advance the cause of detainee welfare and humane treatment." Yet in its ethics code, APA chose not to recognize any humane treatment requirements governing psychologists' work with detainees as enforceable standards.

Historically, when concerns arose about the impact of psychologists' behavior on groups at risk, APA moved decisively to create specific requirements and limitations in the ethics code's enforceable standards. These groups included persons "for whom testing is mandated by law or governmental regulations," "persons with a questionable capacity to consent," research participants, "subordinates," clients, students, supervisees, and employees. Facing concerns about the impact of psychologists' behavior on research animals, for example, APA created an enforceable standard supporting the "humane treatment" of laboratory animals. But for detainees, APA chose not to adopt any enforceable standards in the ethics code mandating humane treatment.

The code's numbered ethical standards "set forth enforceable rules of conduct." The code emphasizes that although other code sections should be given consideration, even the code's "Preamble and General Principles are not themselves enforceable rules..." APA's decision to adopt an enforceable standard regarding "humane treatment" of animals but not to adopt an enforceable standard regarding "humane treatment" of detainees turns APA away from its ethical foundation, historic traditions, and basic values that should endure even in the midst of post-9-11 risks and realities.

My second area of disagreement concerns the ethics code that Council adopted August 21, 2002 (which took effect June 1, 2003). The 2002 code echoes the earlier code in setting forth the following enforceable standard: "If psychologists' ethical responsibilities conflict with law, regulations, or other governing legal authority, psychologists make known their commitment to the Ethics Code and take steps to resolve the conflict." But the 2002 code created a new enforceable standard: "If the conflict is unresolvable via such means, psychologists may adhere to the requirements of the law, regulations, or other governing legal authority" (Standard 1.02).

This new enforceable standard, in my opinion, contradicts one of the essential ethical values voiced in the Nuremberg trials. Even in light of the post-9-11 historical context and challenges, I believe we can never abandon the fundamental ethical value affirmed at Nuremberg.

An attempt to modify Standard 1.02 was placed only in the nonenforceable section. In the 5 years since creating this new enforceable ethical standard in a sharp break with the past, APA chose to make no qualifications, restrictions, or other modifications to Standard 1.02 in the code's enforceable section.

The code's 89 enforceable standards identify diverse ethical responsibilities, some representing the profession's deepest values. The code recognizes that these ethical values can stand in stark, irreconcilable conflict (no matter what steps the psychologist takes to resolve the conflict) with a regulation, a law, or governing legal authority. APA's creation of an enforceable standard allowing psychologists to violate these fundamental ethical responsibilities in favor of following a regulation, a law, or a governing legal authority clashes with its ethical foundation, historic traditions, and basic values.

Such changes in APA's approach to its enforceable ethical standards over the past 6+ years embrace issues of enormous complexity and conflicting values. I've tried during these years to read as widely and carefully as possible in these diverse areas, comparing secondary sources to primary sources and evaluating claims in light of evidence. On one narrow topic, for example, I've read and maintained an archive of citations of over 220 published works (including those from APA) that specifically address the controversy over physicians and psychologists participating in the planning and implementation of detainee interrogations. (The archive is at :
<http://kspope.com/interrogation/index.php&gt .

Over the decades I've written articles and books examining APA's earliest discussions about ethical responsibilities and accountability, the choice to create an ethics code, the innovative methods used to create a unique code, the revisions and controversies over the years, and APA members' ethical views, dilemmas, and behavior. During the code's distinguished history, it has set forth APA's essential ethics and the standards to which members agree to hold themselves accountable through the Ethics Committee's formal enforcement. For me, the two examples above represent defining issues for APA. Steps that APA has taken or avoided since 9-11 mark a sharp shift in values and direction.

I respectfully disagree with these changes; I am skeptical that they will work as intended; and I believe that they may lead to far-reaching unintended consequences.

These changes take APA so far away from its ethical foundation, historic traditions, and basic values, and from my own personal and professional view of our responsibilities, that I cannot support them with my membership. In light of my respectful disagreement with APA about these fundamental changes, it is with great sadness and regret that I resign my membership.

Sincerely,

Ken

Kenneth S. Pope, Ph.D., ABPP

[Octafish]

30. Heartbreaking letter from a highly trained health professional.

The organization has changed. The leadership marches to their own drummer. The nation's priorities are to print money as fast as possible to fully fund War Inc and Wall Street.

We, as a Nation and as a planet, have got some major work that needs to be done. Any agenda for rebuilding the United States infrastructure must also include a rebuild of the nation's health system, especially the good work that the members of the American Psychological Association know how to do and want to do.

That's the change We the People voted for in 2008 and 2012. Now that I think back to it, same in 1992 and 1996. Still waiting, I might add.

[malaise]

19. I love Bill Moyers

big time

[Duppers]

20. Very good point!

[Buzz Clik]

7. Nothing happened to the science, it was the politicians.

And the beat goes on -- human caused climate change has been demonstrated repeatedly and scientifically, but politics will prevent remedial action from EVER taking place.

[Jackpine Radical]

17. Not just the politicians, the corporations.

The corruption of science is real. I could show you clear instances in drug research, for instance.

[Buzz Clik]

18. Drug research corrupt? There have been examples of that.

It generally comes to light eventually. There's bad science out there, and maybe a small percentage corrupt.

Compared to the rampant corruption among politicians, scientific research is pure.

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Here is a classic example.

The corruption doesn't necessarily involve any single clinical trial, but rather the way in which those trials are aggregated. In the case of antidepressants, negative findings were suppressed, leading to false conclusions about the effectiveness of the drugs.

This is from Irving Kirsch's entry in Wikipedia:

Kirsch’s analysis of the effectiveness of antidepressants was an outgrowth of his interest in the placebo effect. His studies in this area are primarily meta-analyses, in which the results of previously conducted clinical trials are aggregated and analyzed statistically. His first meta-analysis was aimed at assessing the size of the placebo effect in the treatment of depression.[7] The results not only showed a sizable placebo effect, but also indicated that the drug effect was surprisingly small. This led Kirsch to shift his interest to evaluating the antidepressant drug effect. Kirsch’s first meta-analysis was limited to published clinical trials. The controversy surrounding this analysis led him to obtain files from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) containing data from trials that had not been published, as well as those data from published trials. Kirsch’s analyses of the FDA data showed that the difference between antidepressant drugs and placebos was not clinically significant, according to the criteria used by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), which establishes treatment guidelines for the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom.[8] Kirsch challenges the chemical-imbalance theory of depression, writing "It now seems beyond question that the traditional account of depression as a chemical imbalance in the brain is simply wrong."

[Jackpine Radical]

14. Ya damn right, Octa.

$ome fields of $cience are totally under the thumb of Big Bu$ine$$. Pharmaceutical research is a leading example. Failures to find treatment effects are often completely suppressed if they don't show the results the drug companies want.

A second whole raft of problems arises from the unholy alliances between university researchers & corporations. There is a distinct movement away from basic science in a quest for work of immediate applied utility, and within that, of research dedicated to corporate profits rather than the public good.

[raouldukelives]

9. K&R And some call it a career. Same as it ever was. nt

[appalachiablue]

10. K & R. Power not only corrupts it kills, even the chemical way. In the meantime over decades

the profit that is brought in from the related diseases is a huge boon to Big Pharma and the medical and insurance industries. God bless you Rachel Carson, outstanding scientist and advocate with your books like "Silent Spring" (1962), warnings about DDT, synthetic pesticides and other harmful chems that led the way.

But we have fallen back tremendously since then, from 1980s free market Miltonism and deregulation of environmental and energy laws, corrupt scientists and academics paid by corporations and even high government officials in federal and state agencies from within the chemical, agricultural and energy industries.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Carson

[Dont call me Shirley]

25. +1,000,000,000!

[appalachiablue]

27. Sure, things are a wreck now, sigh. Carson was a force, and in very different times.

I'd like to go by Rachel Carson's home in Silver Spring, MD sometime. A regular place but home for her while she worked for the govt. I just bought 'Silent Spring' and a reprint copy of 'The Dairy of Anne Frank" with a forward by Eleanor Roosevelt, at the incredible FDR Memorial in DC for a young relative. She is already very bright and intuitive, and will need to be as equipped as possible in this world, Lord knows.

[Dont call me Shirley]

29. Rachel was a prophetic genius. Still so relevant today.

[blackspade]

11. Excellent article.

[haele]

12. Our vet says fire retardant chemicals have been linked to cancers and thyroid problem in small pets.

- especially carcinomas in the jawbones and sinus structures. She's found these chemicals in high amounts in the blood and organs when she's done a necropsy on an animal that had cancer or died of a sudden, unexplained causes.
She often asks what sorts of carpeting and upholstery the critters have been exposed to, and found that the majority of these carcinomas occur when the owner has industrial-rated synthetic carpeting, vinyl flooring, faux leather and/or light synthetic cloth upholstery. When she does blood-work for cancers, thyroid, and chronic issues, she'll more often than not find fire retardant chemical residue in samples.
While this linkage is still somewhat under contention (correlation/causation issues), we did find that both my two furry boy babies, who both developed a particularly aggressive bone cancer in the jaw two years apart soon after we moved to our last rental house (with cheap synthetic office carpeting all over the place), had significantly higher levels of both formaldehyde and various fire retardant chemicals in their bloodstream than they had when tested five years earlier - when we were living in a house with hardwood flooring. Our 45 lb. dog started getting seizures, also.
Now, the boys were older house cats (14 years old), and Shari was around 9 years old when we moved, but still - I wonder how much damage that carpet did to their systems. They all passed within 2 - 4 years after we moved into that house.
My husband started to develop immune system issues before we moved out; he was disabled before, but he really started going downhill while we were living there. Again, what would be causation and correlation - but he did spend a lot more time in the house than I did, so his exposure was greater.

Haele

[Duppers]

22. K & R

[whatchamacallit]

23. Anti-science

Don't you know science is always right? (even when it does a 180)

[Dont call me Shirley]

24. So there!!!! To all Monsanto defenders!!!!! Here!!!!!

[appalachiablue]

28. K & R. Thank you for the great information and the post.