|
|
|
|
There are numerous past events, incidents, and practices that document Dow Chemical's corporate ethics and business conduct. The chlorpyrifos issues are just a part of many others for Dow Chemical. When all of these events are seen together to understand the "big picture" of Dow there is only a very disgusting conclusion to how Dow operates and the low level of their ethics. Here is a link to a stockholder site and a report detailing many of the current publicly known issues that Dow's business practices have caused. That site's information makes no mention of chlorpyrifos oxon in its discussion of the Dow chlorpyrifos liability issue because they are unaware of this newly exposed information and how Dow has hidden it to prolong chlorpyrifos sales. Dow has many more skeletons in its closet. Environmental and social responsibility considerations are not factors in Dow business decisions. Profits are the driving force. Just one more example of Dow's total lack of environmental responsibility is shown in the care they have taken for even their own environment. If they take care of their own "backyard" in such an irresponsible and careless manner they certainly are not going to be careful with your's. This has been proven all over the U.S. and in other countries. Dow's "backyard" is the Midland-Saginaw-Bay City Area in Michigan where the company headquarters in located. It is one of the most polluted areas in the U.S. and Dow has fought their responsibility in cleaning up the consequences of their chemical factory's irresponsible dumping of chemical wastes. Instead Dow has fought and prolonged the regulatory process attempting to force them to clean up their mess.
Don't think you're safe if you don't live in Michigan. Their environmental record impacts all the U.S. in their releasing more than 14 million pounds of toxins per year into American air. Dow has also been linked to 96 of the United States' worst toxic waste dumps. Dow is one of the top ten parties potentially responsible for Superfund toxic sites, and like the rest of the defendants associated with the Superfund, is continuing attempts to avoid payments and clean up. Clearly, Dow sees spending a few dollars to falsely raise the public's perception of Dow as easier than to actually be responsible. Perception is Not Reality So how does Dow attempt to raise the public's perception of the Dow Chemical Company? Dow Management utilizes well-know and respected individuals like Princeton University's Past-President on the Dow Board of Directors. Princeton supposedly has a stringent Code of Ethics. Certainly, utilizing respected individuals on the Board helps Dow raise the public's perception of the company's ethics and integrity. The over-whelming question here is do these individuals truly understand the type company they are helping to run? There are only two answers to that question - they are naive or ignoring what Dow does or they are a part of how Dow operates. Either way their association with Dow is prostituting the respect they have gained from their association with a respectable organization and their involvement with Dow is then tarnishing that organization's respect. To help the public's perception of Dow further, Dow management also carefully donates monies to truly worthwhile causes such as the Indonesian Tsunamis Victims or Habitat for Humanity. Dow gives charitable organizations huge amounts of money while it knowingly does incredibly immoral, unethical, and criminal acts. Dow management believes this will absolve their unethical behavior. These organizations should examine their relationship with a company such as Dow which prostitutes their name and respect. Is anyone safe at Dow? You might conclude that the Dow workplace is a "cannibalistic environment" after understanding the nature of how Dow operates. To gain a better understanding of the Dow Chemical Corporation and the disrespect they have for even their own employees, read this PBS documentary about how Dow Chemical hid the fatal health risks during the production of one of Dow's products from even Dow employees. It's a disgusting but true example of Dow arrogance and how they will jeopardize anyone's health for corporate profits. Imagine knowingly watching your colleagues kill themselves and intentionally withholding information that could save their lives. This is another previously documented example similar in nature to the business behavior Dow has used in the marketing of chlorpyrifos (Dursban, Lorsban, etc.) and it is used with many other Dow products. Chlorpyrifos though has affected over 80% of the U.S. population so the answer is that no one is safe from Dow. So how does a "cannibalistic" employer make money off the deaths of their own workers, workers who the company knows are being put in life threatening workplace conditions? It has recently been discovered that Dow has secretly taken out life insurance on many of their plant workers. The insurance policies only came to light because Dow Chemical sued the Internal Revenue Service two years ago to recover $22.2 million in federal income taxes and interest it believed it overpaid. The IRS contended Dow had improperly deducted a $30.3 million loan used to pay the premiums and $2.7 million in administrative expenses between 1989 and 1991. Dow Chemical took out policies on 21,000 employees. The practice is called "Dead Peasant" Insurance. What a sure bet! Put your workers into vinyl chloride vats to clean them out, or other hazardous situations knowing it's going to kill them. Then collect the life insurance payout. This a superb example of the kind of thinking that routinely goes on at Dow. It is incredibly unethical, immoral, and should definitively be criminal for an employer to benefit from the death of workers. Workers who through example after example are jeopardizing their lives because Dow hides the hazards of the products it produces. It's the same type of thinking that can rationalize Dow's denial of their responsibility for the tens of thousands of injured and dead in Bhopal, India from the deadly explosion at the plant they own. Our representatives in Congress have pushed Dow to take responsibility for Bhopal but our representatives don't seem to see the fact that Dow is operating with the same irresponsible behavior right here in the U.S.. Dow Employment It takes a special type of person to want to work at Dow. With all these issues, working for Dow either takes someone naive to what Dow does or someone who lacks social conscience. Some go to work for Dow with great intentions of making things better or helping with innovations but most employees ultimately realize to some extent just how unethical Dow truly operates. Dow Cover-up
The insight brought forth so far should also raise enough serious questions about the validity of any information or research data that Dow Chemical or Dow AgroSciences provides. They clearly have held back information from regulators, researchers, and users of their products, even from their own employees. When Dow can't sell their products through legitimate means they have even been caught bribing officials to get their products registered. And if they don't like the public information that is being presented, Dow will alter that information too. Wikipedia, the internet informational encyclopedia provider, recently discovered that Dow edited information in the encyclopedia that was seen as negative towards Dow. The information Dow edited was about the Bhopal Plant catastrophe and about birth defects caused by dioxin in Agent Orange, a herbicide used in Vietnam and produced by Dow. This is some of the same dioxin now polluting Dow's "backyard" in Michigan. The level of manipulation Dow uses to shape information makes the information not just biased but complete propaganda. And the Dow employees creating it aren't prosecuted by regulatory agencies when it is discovered. They are allowed to be promoted by Dow to new positions to continue their work. Dow's information can not be relied upon for any level of decision making.
In regard
to valid Dow information, several years ago you probably heard the term
"Junk Science" bouncing around the news. Dow was a heavy promoter of
presenting the idea of "Junk Science" to defend their chlorpyrifos
products when the products started coming under the attack by the EPA
under the Food Quality Protection Act (FPQA). Dow used a well-known and
liked public news figure to promote the idea that the FPQA was
unjustifiably restricting safe products from use. At that time the EPA
was mandated by congress to implement FPQA. One of the EPA's
fundamental
concerns under FPQA was the widespread usage of chlorpyrifos insecticide
on farm produced food while it was also used in homes, businesses,
restaurants, food handling/distribution, and processing plants. The
cumulative exposure to chlorpyrifos was worrisome to the EPA.
Humorously, one could actually conclude that the EPA was indeed using
"Junk Science" for the reasons to restrict chlorpyrifos. After all, Dow
provided the preponderance of the chlorpyrifos toxicity data and as
already shown that data was Dow junk science data. The EPA had already
seen that Dow was hiding adverse chlorpyrifos complaints and suspected
that Dow's research and toxicology studies were being biased by Dow
influences. Outside studies clearly show that over 80% of the U.S.
population has or has had chlorpyrifos in their bodies. With all that
Dow has been shown to have been hiding, FPQA was a late measure in
assuring the public's safety. Since the EPA has never pursued Dow
Management to date, what corrective measures has the EPA put in place
today to assure the public that Dow products are safe? None. What's being "cooked" at Dow AgroSciences next? We've also learned of additional information about other Dow products. We have learned that the intentional under-reporting of adverse health complaints and well contaminations with chlorpyrifos are just the beginning of discovery of many issues. For example, Dow has used lab samples instead of production samples for toxicity testing with one of their major products because the production samples were "dirty" and had significant additional toxic compounds as compared to the cleaner, laboratory-controlled product samples. Dow hid the problems with this product by using the clean laboratory-produced samples to gain registration. This is fraudulent falsification of federally required information by the Dow Chemical Corporation and this again confirms the fact that no Dow research can be trusted. Dow has also recently registered Profume* (Sulfuryl fluoride) for use in fumigating food commodities. There is not a pesticide used today that directly impacts our food supply in the entire world more than a fumigant. Now Profume will be used to fumigate our food supply. Do you feel confident that this new Dow product has fully been investigated and has properly passed all the toxicology testing after understanding the dishonesty at Dow? Entire shiploads of food products will be fumigated with Profume. Most of the foods that are fumigated are ready for your table without further processing. The registration of Profume also has incredible similarities to Dow's move in having chlorpyrifos replace chlordane in the structural pest control market back in 1989. Now Dow's Profume product is replacing methyl bromide which is considered an ozone depleter and methyl bromide is being phased out of most fumigant uses. Dow at one time also produced methyl bromide but got out of direct sales when competition got too fierce. They have been positioning their Profume product to replace methyl bromide for over fifteen years. At least one state which certainly realizes what its dealing with at Dow has so far not registered Profume. That state is New York and it appears they are skeptical of the registration information Dow has provided to the EPA.
We rely on
the EPA to fulfill it's responsibilities in overseeing companies like
Dow. But it certainly appears the EPA is being played by Dow for profits
at the cost of our health and our environment. Stephen Johnson,
Administrator of the EPA has knowledge of what Dow has been doing from
his previous position as Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of
Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances when that department fined
Dow AgroSciences for failing to report adverse incidents in the late
1990's. Several individuals have solemnly concluded that maybe the EPA's
name is exactly what the EPA feels is their sole responsibility "Environmental
Protection" not people/health protection. Pesticide human safety issues
may be better dealt with at the FDA. Dow Risk Reduction is Lobbying to Limit Litigation
When you
run a company in such a unethical and risky manner how do you protect it from
litigation? Dow fully supports litigation reform. Dow pays millions to lobbyists
working to influence our elected representatives on litigation reform.
Dow wants to cap the maximum dollar amount that they can be sued for in court.
They want to reduce and limit the potential liabilities their business
practices cause for their company. When you run a company in the manner
such as the Dow Chemical Company runs that only makes sense. Buying from Dow
Customers
of Dow should now realize that information provided by Dow is not going
to warn you of the true dangers of Dow products. Their information could easily lead
to a lackadaisical attitude in using a product which could actually have
serious use risks. Buyers should also look at what they are funding by doing business with Dow.
Do you really want to do business with Dow? Dow doesn't respect or show
any concern for anyone so you should take "Buyer Beware" far more
seriously in any dealings with Dow.
"What Dow doesn't tell you [about their products] is far
more important than what they do." Conclusion Understand that the information presented is only a synopsis of how Dow routinely operates and just some of the issues involving Dow. There are hundreds of additional issues surrounding Dow business practices. Are all Dow products marketed with the same level of ethics and integrity? Have they falsified registration or other toxic studies? We have been provided with additional information that shows they have and history now shows it's the way of conducting business at Dow - "Marketing Under the Radar of Regulatory". One would think that with all the issues surrounding Dow that Dow would be doing everything possible to at least act like they are ethical but it seems to be just the opposite. Dow is becoming brazenly more arrogant and more unethical. They just don't care, not even about getting caught. It's apparent they amusingly laugh at regulations and government regulatory agencies. They don't see discovery by regulators as much of a threat. As Dow top management has verbally expressed, "There aren't any sharp tacks in the box", referring to the EPA's competency in regulating Dow. The information presented should leave you with one consuming question, "How does Dow Chemical get away with so much?".
Should you wish to share your experience, have a question, or want to be notified of new information, please go here. |
|
|
*Dursban, Lorsban, Equity, Empire, Reldan, Pageant, and Tenure are registered trademarks of Dow AgroSciences |
|
