13.07.2015 Views

The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

44 the <strong>world</strong> <strong>according</strong> <strong>to</strong> monsan<strong>to</strong>nam veterans, “for a very simple reason: the two principal manufacturers,Dow Chemical <strong>and</strong> Monsan<strong>to</strong>, deliberately concealed the data they had inorder not <strong>to</strong> lose a very lucrative market. I’m not afraid <strong>to</strong> say that this wasan out-<strong>and</strong>-out conspiracy.”*With offices in Oakl<strong>and</strong>, California, Gerson Smoger has specialized inenvironmental <strong>pollution</strong> cases—as noted, he represented residents of TimesBeach—<strong>and</strong> he has also been prominent in class actions against pharmaceuticalgiants <strong>and</strong> <strong>to</strong>bacco companies. But his most important workinvolves Agent Orange. For years he has been collecting thous<strong>and</strong>s of documentsin his office basement, carefully arranged in numbered boxes, a mindbogglingsight. “It takes months <strong>to</strong> consult them all,” Smoger said with asmile at my look of distress. “But I have been able <strong>to</strong> find proof that the behaviorof Dow Chemical <strong>and</strong> Monsan<strong>to</strong> was criminal. First, contrary <strong>to</strong> whattheir executives said, they regularly tested the dioxin content of their products,but they never transmitted their results <strong>to</strong> the public health or militaryauthorities. <strong>The</strong> Monsan<strong>to</strong> case is particularly serious, because the AgentOrange the company produced in its Sauget fac<strong>to</strong>ry contained the highestlevel of dioxin.”Smoger was referring <strong>to</strong> a memor<strong>and</strong>um from Dow Chemical dated February22, 1965, describing a meeting of thirteen executives of the firm inwhich they discussed the <strong>to</strong>xicity of 2,4,5-T. <strong>The</strong>y agreed <strong>to</strong> organize a meetingwith other manufacturers of Agent Orange, including Monsan<strong>to</strong> <strong>and</strong>Hercules, “<strong>to</strong> discuss <strong>to</strong>xicological problems caused by the presence of certainhighly <strong>to</strong>xic impurities” in samples of 2,4,5-T. “<strong>The</strong> meeting was keptstrictly confidential,” said Smoger. “Dow spoke of an internal study thatshowed that rabbits exposed <strong>to</strong> dioxin developed severe liver lesions. <strong>The</strong>question was whether the government should be informed. As a letter, ofwhich I also have a copy, proves, Monsan<strong>to</strong> criticized Dow for wanting <strong>to</strong> revealthe secret. And the secret was kept for at least four years, the yearswhen the spraying of Agent Orange reached a peak in Vietnam.”By late 1969, government authorities could no longer say that they wereuninformed: a study conducted by Diane Courtney for the National Institutesof Health (NIH) found that mice subjected <strong>to</strong> significant doses of2,4,5-T developed fetal malformations <strong>and</strong> produced stillbirths. 20 <strong>The</strong> news*Seven companies produced Agent Orange: Dow Chemical, Monsan<strong>to</strong>, Diamond Shamrock, Hercules,T. H. Agriculture & Nutrition, Thompson Chemicals, <strong>and</strong> Uniroyal.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!